Autonomous Systems Lab

Prof. Roland Siegwart

Studies on Mechatronics

MEMS Inertial Sensors

Technology
Autumn Term 2013

Supervised by:
Janosh Nikolic
Michael Bloesch

Author:
Felix Renaut

Declaration of Originality

I hereby declare that the written work I have submitted entitled

Studies on Mechatronics : MEMS Inertial Sensor Technology
is original work which I alone have authored and which is written in my own words.1

Author(s)
Felix Renaut
Supervising lecturer
Janosch Nikolic

With the signature I declare that I have been informed regarding normal academic
citation rules and that I have read and understood the information on Citation
etiquette (http://www.ethz.ch/students/exams/plagiarism_s_en.pdf). The
citation conventions usual to the discipline in question here have been respected.
The above written work may be tested electronically for plagiarism.

Place and date

Signature

1 Co-authored work: The signatures of all authors are required. Each signature attests to the
originality of the entire piece of written work in its final form.

Contents
Symbols

1 Introduction

2 Working principles
2.1 MEMS accelerometers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.1.1 Principle of a displacement-based MEMS accelerometer . . .
2.1.2 Capacitive-based displacement accelerometers . . . . . . . . .
2.1.3 Piezoelectric and piezoresistive-based displacement accelerometers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.1.4 Resonance-based MEMS accelerometers . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.2 MEMS gyroscopes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.2.1 Principle of a gyroscope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.2.2 Tuning forks or resonant beam MEMS gyroscopes . . . . . .
2.2.3 Vibrating plate MEMS gyroscopes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.3 Inertial measurement units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.3.1 Definition and purpose of an IMU . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.3.2 Algorithms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3
3
3
4

3 Performance and applications

3.1 MEMS inertial sensors error characteristics . . . . .
3.1.1 Bias offset and drift . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.1.2 Noise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.1.3 Stochastic modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.1.4 Data filtering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2 Comparison with classic inertial sensor performances
3.2.1 Common performance criteria . . . . . . . . .
3.2.2 Accelerometers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2.3 Gyroscopes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2.4 MEMS IMUs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.3 Future developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.3.1 Multi-directional MEMS inertial sensors . . .
3.3.2 New applications of MEMS inertial sensors .

5
6
7
7
7
8
9
9
9

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

11
11
11
12
12
14
15
15
16
18
18
20
20
20

4 Conclusion
4.1 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.2 Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

23
23
23

Bibliography

25

iii

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Symbols
Symbols
roll, pitch and yaw angle
constant sensor bias
3-axis gyroscope measurement

, ,

m

Indices
x
y
z

x axis
y axis
z axis

Acronyms and Abbreviations

ETH
MEMS
GPS
IMU
PSD
ARW
LQE
DARPA

Eidgen
ossische Technische Hochschule
Micro Electro-Mechanical System
Global Positioning System
Inertial Measurement Unit
Power Spectral Density
Angle Random Walk
Linear Quadratic Estimation
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency

Chapter 1

Introduction
Inertial navigation is a technique in which the position and orientation of an object is
determined through the data given by accelerometers and gyroscopes. The results
obtained are therefore calculated only from the initial position, orientation and
movement of the object itself, and not compared to an external frame of reference,
as it is the case for other navigation systems such as GPS or radars.
The first inertial navigation systems were developed for the first long-range rockets
in World War II, since no external reference could be used to determine the position
of those objects in flight. However, the development of inertial navigation mostly
took place during the cold war through the american and the soviet space programs,
and the first space missions were only possible due to groundbreaking progress in
inertial sensor technology. Inertial sensors are today used in a wide range of objects,
from airplanes or the automotive industry to smartphones or running shoes.
Most of todays inertial sensors are micro electromechanical systems (MEMS). This
technology was first used for commercial purposes in the 1990s, and enabled new
applications through high miniaturization and cost reduction. Inertial sensors began
to be used in completely new domains, such as toys. However, this miniaturization
and cost reduction influences the performance of the accelerometers and gyroscopes,
which explains why some inertial sensors based on previous technologies are still
used for high-performance purposes.
In the following report, the physical working principles of recent MEMS inertial
sensors will be explained, and their performance studied. The aim of this studies on
mechatronics report is to have a better understanding of these widely used sensors
and of their applications.

Chapter 1. Introduction

Chapter 2

Working principles
In the following, different types of MEMS inertial sensors and the physical properties
they rely on are described.

2.1
2.1.1

MEMS accelerometers
Principle of a displacement-based MEMS accelerometer

Most MEMS accelerometers are based on the measurement of the displacement of

a proof mass as a result of a change in acceleration. The proof mass is fixed to
the sensor platform by a mechanical spring-damping system, which usually consists
of small beams [1] . The acceleration of the proof mass can be calculated using
Newtons second law F = m
x and is equal to the acceleration of the object plus
a relative part. This relative part is the result of a change in acceleration of the
object. For a single direction and without any rotation of the object, we get :
m(a(t) + x
r (t)) = dx r (t) kxr (t)

(2.1)

where xr is the displacement of the proof mass with a known mass m relatively
to the object, i.e. if the object is taken as frame of reference, a the unknown
acceleration of the object in a desired frame of reference (e.g. the earth), k the
spring constant and d the damping constant of the mechanical system.

Figure 2.1: Mechanical model of a displacement-based accelerometer

For the measurements, the system is assumed to be in a steady-state, which means
that the displacement is constant, i.e. x
r = x r = 0. This leads to the following
linear relationship between the desired acceleration and the displacement of the
proof mass :
3

Chapter 2. Working principles

a(t) =

k
xr (t)
m

(2.2)

In many applications, the acceleration is the only desired parameter. However, for
navigation purposes, the position and velocity can also be determined through integration when knowing the initial velocity and position 1 . In almost all sensors, the
proof mass is only able to move in one direction, which means three different linear accelerometers have to be combined to measure a three-dimensional movement.
There are several ways of measuring the displacement of the proof mass. However, the most current ones are capacitors, piezoelectric crystals and piezoresistive
materials.

2.1.2

Capacitive-based displacement accelerometers

Capacitive-based accelerometers are using the fact that the capacitance of a given
plate capacitor is inversely proportional to the distance between the plates [2,
p. 182ff.] :

Cplate (d) =

0 r A
d

(2.3)

If this distance changes due to a movement of the proof mass, the capacitance
changes and the change in the electrical potential between the electrodes can be
measured. In order to augment the sensors sensitivity and to reduce the noise,
many capacitors can be combined linearly to create the output signal. Both in-plane
accelerometers, in which the proof mass moves in the plane of the device and outof-plane accelerometers, in which the proof mass can rotate perpendicularly to the
plane of the device on which the electrodes are put on, can use this physical property.
An example of in-plane and out-of-plane capacitive-based MEMS accelerometers is
shown in Fig. 2.1.2 .

1 given a constant orientation of the sensor, i.e. for a stable-platform IMU. In the case of
strap-down IMUs, the orientation of the object is also needed, since the direction of the measured
acceleration can vary in time. For more information, please refer to section 2.3.2.

-4#&'"4')&4)&'#-03',*"1*'%&)$2.)'"4'-'>E?6!'F>A
Navigation
Sensors

?>G

H'0&-I'1*-4#&'"4'1-0-1".-41
>AA'B?#3'".'")'4&1&))-%/'.+'%&)+2:&'7+."+4'+6'D'9'>A?>E'73'+%'-8+$.'EE;G'&2&
7-))'0&%'1-%%"&%'1/12&;'
?90@A"0
6->
3->
3-

6-

2.1. MEMS accelerometers

!"0
&15

+,-&(
./01#

+*=B#"

3-

6-

6->

6-;0<&9&*=0
8#9)&:0

3->

Figure 2.2: Typical structure of in-plane (left) and out-of-plane (right) capacitivebased MEMS accelerometers. On the left, the measured acceleration is parallel to
the plane of the device, whereas on the right, it is perpendicular to it (from [3]).

(a) In-Plane Accelerometer

30"4#
,#150*'

6-7(&'8#

(b) In-Plane Accelerometer Schematic

Figure 9: MEMS Lateral Accelerometer.

(! )$**+,-&)-! &.! (#$! /&%%$0/12*+3024$! 1-+5*2-$! 2//$*$0&%$($0'! 20$! 50&626*7! (#$! 8-2*&3!
?!2-4!89;<@>?A!"#$!*2(($0!%$2'B0$'!*2($02*!2//$*$02(1&-'!1-!()&!2C$'!)1(#!2!-&1'$!.*&&0!&.!=
Figure 2.3: Functioning principle of in-plane (left) and out-of-plane (right)
2/7!20&B-4!=?+>?!%3A!
capacitive-based MEMS accelerometers, from [4].

%$-(! 2//$*$0&%$($0'! /2-! 6$! &5$02($4! &5$-! &0! /*&'$4! *&&5A! G&*1607'! HI$.A! JKL! #2'! 0$5&0(
2.1.3 Piezoelectric and piezoresistive-based displacement ac.&0! (#$! IMK???! '$01$'!
2//$*$0&%$($0'! &5$02(1-3! &5$-! *&&5! 1-! (#$! &B(+&.+5*2-$! 2-4
celerometers
' 2! /2-(
(1&-'A! N&(#! 4$:1/$'!
20$! 2**+'1*1/&-! /&-'(0B/(1&-O! )1(#! (#$! &B(+&.+5*2-$! 4$:1/$! #2:1-3!
A piezoelectric material is a crystal which generates a voltage when mechanical
''! '2-4)1/#$4! 6$()$$-!
B55$0!
*&)$0!
$*$/(0&4$'A!
P$0.&0%2-/$!
QB&($4! 1'! R=@?! S3! 1-+0
stress is applied
to it.2-4!
On the
opposite,
applying an electric
field on the crystal
Figure
8:
MEMS
Pendulous
Accelerometer.
generates
a deformation.
This effect
is due to the physical disposition of the atoms
=+%3! (B0-+&-! 0$5$2(261*1(7O!
T??+55%! '/2*$+.2/(&0! 2//B02/7O! 2-4! 0$/(1.1/2(1&-! &.! U>! S
in piezoelectric crystals, in which a deformation of the crystal separates the electric
charges 855*1/2(1&-+M5$/1.1/!
from one another. Commonly used
piezoelectricG10/B1(!
materials W8MVGX!
are quartz and
B0$! '$-'&0! 2-4! 4131(2*!
V-($302($4!
1'! 1-($302($4! )1(#! (#$
(# zirconate titanate, a ceramic perovskite crystal). For a perfectly uniform
PZT (lead
(&! .B0-1'#! &-+6&204!
T ! +&04$0! ($%5$02(B0$! /&%5$-'2(1&-A! G&*1607'! #2'! 2*'&! '#&)-! HI$.A! T?
piezoelectric crystal and a given direction of the force applied to the crystal, the
(#
*")'./0&'+6'-11&2&%+7&.&%'")'K+%.*%+0'L%$77-4M)'N"J13'+6',*"1*'+:&%'
charge difference
hence(&!
the 2!
output
voltage is *1-$201(7!
linear to this force.
*(2! > +&04$0! 0$3B*2(1&-!
*&&5!and
*$24'!
402%2(1/!
1%50&:$%$-(! 2-4! /&-'$QB$-(*7
:&%)"+4)' *-:&' 8&&4' 5&:&2+0&5' F.-1."1-2'
#%-5&' -45' "4&%."-2' #%-5&H' -45' *-:&
X
Y1602(1&-!I$/(1.1/2(1&-!Z00&0!WYIZXA!
Qi =

dij Fj

(2.4)

L<QPN3' -45' R+77-41*&' *&2"1+0.&%;' S.*&%' &9-702&)' -%&' T+4&/,&223' R+

In the case ofW67!
an accelerometer,
the applied force
is the result of M(2-.&04!
the acceleration
*&37! B-4$0! 4$:$*&5%$-(!
EB3#$'! I$'$20/#!
<26&02(&07O!
[-1:$0'1(7O! 2-4! &(#$
of
the
object
applied
on
the
proof
mass
of
the
sensor,
and
is
given
directly using
V<N'
W41;3'
N"2"1+4'
X&)"#4)3'
N*&%8+%4&'
N&4)+%)'
F=YH3'
Z+)1*'
FL&%7-4/
:$07!#13#!'$-'1(1:1(7!0$24&B(!.&0!2!F+2C1'!41'5*2/$%$-(!2//$*$0&%$($0!1'!(#$!(B--$*1-3!2//$*$0
Newtons second law. The sensitivity of the sensor is therefore given by the piezoelectric coefficients which are different for each material and each direction. This
is why having a uniform crystal with as little impurities as possible is essential for
the range and accuracy of the accelerometer. Many different dispositions of the
piezoelectric crystal and the proof mass are possible depending on the application
domain of the given accelerometer.
Piezoresistive materials are similar to piezoelectric materials, except that a change
in mechanical stress F results in a change of the materials resistivity. The resulting
resistivity is also linear with the applied force for a given direction and material,
and can be determined by measuring the electric voltage U for a constant electric
current I and using Ohms Law :

?W2X!'#&)'!2!'/#$%2(1/!&.!2!(B--$*1-3!2//$*$0&%$($0A!"#$!/&-(0&*!$*$/(0&4$!$*$/(0&'(2(1/2**7!
$:$0! 1-(&! (#$! (B--$*1-3! 5&'1(1&-! W]=! S%! 2-4! R@?! YXA! 8! '$0:&! %$/#2-1'%! #&*4'! /&-'(2-(!
(#$!(B--$*1-3!(15!W\13B0$!=?W6XX!2-4!(#$!/2-(1*$:$0O!2-4!#$-/$!#&*4'!/&-'(2-(!(#$!(B--$*1-3!/B0
&'()*+,'(#*8('1+5/0&'(6*7*)#+(66*'*8!7*#*8'"4',*"1*'0%++6'7-))'5")02-1&7
&B(5B(!'13-2*!1'!(#$!/#2-3$!1-!:&*(23$!2(!(#$!$*$/(0&4$!B-4$0!2//$*$02(1&-A!"#$'$!4$:1/$'!20$!4
-0-1".-41&'-1%+))'.*&'1+78'6"4#&%);'O*")'-11&2&%+7&.&%'")'7$1*'7+%&')&4)"
$! 2//$*$02(1&-'! 1-! (#$! -2-&+3! 02-3$! 2-4! 0$QB10$! *&)+0$'&-2-(! .0$QB$-/7! 50&&.! %2''$'! 2
"#*.'
F%-.*&%' .*-4' .+0?.+?8+..+7H' 5"%&1."+4;' O*&' 1+78"4-."+4' +6' U?-9")' -45'
!0$'&*B(1&-!0$24&B('A!I$/$-(!%1/0&.2601/2($4!(B--$*1-3!2//$*$0&%$($0'!#2:$!0$'&*:$4!@?!-3D
0."7"U&5'
)/).&7' :+2$7&3' )"41&' .*%&&' -9&)' +6' -11&2&%-."+4' 7&-)$%&7&4.' 1
A>!,EF!HI$.A!T=L!)1(#!2!/*&'$4+*&&5!47-2%1/!02-3$!&.!&:$0!K?!4NA!E&)$:$0O!%2C1%B%!2//$
%$-(!/25261*1(7!1'!:$07!*&)!WR=!%3X!)1(#&B(!.B0(#$0!*&&5!%&41.1/2(1&-A!8!(B--$*1-3!2//$*$0&%
*"0);'
$.A!T@L!#2'!$C#161($4!3&&4!*&)!.0$QB$-/7!0$'&*B(1&-!&.!=>!-3DEF!&:$0!=!(&!=??!EFA!

>&,C KE,).4/3)'-H42<<2(1L
F :*-+8'-2,)'104'/4.2/()'A2.4A04,..'1'*-,8412)&4'-4MN

Chapter 2.

'

& F L ww$ x# t " % w % w$ x# t "

w
x
t
w
E
w % w$ x# t "
$
#
"

&
EI
 N
 UF

wx
Working principles

wx '
wt %
% L ! wx wx % 6

7'2)

!"#$$#!%$!

U = R(F ) I

&'()*+,+-./+01.(23*4*5,000000$6$7%8!$7%%

(2.5)

&'()*+ ,-. -,-*

Piezoelectric and piezoresistive-based accelerometers usually have a higher robustness and range than capacitive-based accelerometers but are less precise and are
therefore often used in high-shock applications.

2.1.4

Resonance-based MEMS accelerometers

Many mechanical systems such as pendulums, or basically any system mounted

on springs, have a periodical movement. The amplitude of this movement is maximized for certain excitation frequencies, called resonance frequencies. An interesting
property around the resonance frequency is that a small variation in the excitation
frequency results in a high change in amplitude, as shown in Fig. 2.4.

9:)5.7;/<4'-=>.0?@@.(-+

P,)H24Q&38'1B.242<<2(1/
Figure 2.4: Amplitude as a function of frequency for a general vibration movement.
1 is the resonance frequency, the excitation frequency (from [4]).
This physical property can be of great use for sensors : by exciting a mechanical
&'()*+,+-./+01.(23*4*5,000000$6$7%8!$7%%
structure at its resonant frequency !"#$$#!%$!
through an actuator,
a small change in the
frequency, for example due to an additional force on the structure, results in a
great change in amplitude of the vibrating structure. If this amplitude change can
be measured accurately, a sensor with high sensitivity can be obtained.
Likewise to displacement-based accelerometers, the change of frequency can be measured capacitively or with the use of a piezoelectric crystal. The actuator, which
enables the proof-mass to vibrate, usually uses the same physical property than
the sensor used to measure this change of frequency, e.g. a piezoelectric crystal or
a capacitor powered by alternative current with a certain frequency. Resonancebased accelerometers usually are more precise, but more cost-effective than simple
displacement-based accelerometers due to the additional presence of an actuator.

2.2
2.2.1

MEMS gyroscopes
Principle of a gyroscope

Mechanical gyroscopes are based on the Coriolis effect, which is a phenomenon

observed when an object is moving with a certain velocity in a rotating frame of
reference. To an observer in this frame of reference, the object seems to change its

7'2)

&'()*+ ,-. -,-*

2.2. MEMS gyroscopes

trajectory. The apparent force on the object is called Coriolis force, and is proportional to the rotation speed of the frame of reference. Its direction is perpendicular
to the rotation direction of the reference frame and to the velocity of the moving
object.

F Coriolis = 2mobject (
v )

(2.6)

By measuring the effect of this force on a proof mass which is moving at a known
velocity, the rotational speed of the frame of reference, i.e. the one of the object
the sensor is placed on, can be determined.

2.2.2

Tuning forks or resonant beam MEMS gyroscopes

Since the proof mass has to be in constant motion for the Coriolis effect to appear,
MEMS gyroscopes are mostly based on resonant structures. Those structures have
to be put in motion using an actuator, which can be for instance a piezoelectric
crystal put under a varying electric tension or two electrodes which are alternatively
switched on and off. Usually, the physical principle used for the actuator is the same
as the one used to measure a change in frequency of the proof-mass.
A quite simple example of a resonant structure used for MEMS gyroscopes is what
is called a tuning fork, which is lately nothing more than the combination of two
beams of same length and material on a common shaft, which is excited at their
resonance frequency, resulting in a type of balanced oscillator where the two beams
oscillate 180 out-of-phase. Compared to a single beam, this structure is more energy efficient and more accurate. When a rotation of the system occurs in a direction
perpendicular to the vibration direction of the beams, the resulting Coriolis force
changes the frequency of the vibration, which can be detected using a piezoelectric
or piezoresistive material on the common shaft. An example of a MEMS tuning
fork gyroscope is Systron Donners quartz gyroscope shown in Fig. 2.6 which was
very successful in the 1990s as a low-cost yaw-rate sensor [3] .

Figure 2.5: Working principle of a tuning fork MEMS gyroscope, without rotation
(left) and when a rotation of the object occurs (right).

Inertial Navigation Sensors

Chapter 2. Working principles

!"#$$#!%$!

! structure comFigure 2.6: Systron Donner QRS and its characteristic H-formed
posed of two tuning fork-shaped piezoelectric quartz elements. It measures a change
Figure 13: Systron Donner Quartz Rate Sensor (QRS)
of orientation normal
to the plane [3] .
( BEI Systron Donner Inertial Division, printed with permission).

"#$%&'(!)*+%&,*#-!.#,$-%&,$/!01%2!3).04!5&(!&!(6$7*8*7!*#(9:&,*#-!(1(,$;!82%!,5$!<*+%&,*#-!$:$;$#,(!3(*;*:&%!
,2!,5$*%!=.)>!&77$:$%2;$,$%4!,2!%$/97$!$#$%-1!:2(($(!29,!28!,5$!(,%97,9%$?!"9,69,!#2*($!*(!@?@A!3/$-B(4BCD!*#!
2.2.3 Vibrating plate MEMS gyroscopes
12'(90:*4,+'4'(*30;,)*+(*<.0=>*+(2?
&!A@@!CD!EF?!G&-$;'(!H9&6&(2#!-1%2!5&(!829%!I9&%,D!,*#$(!$J,$#/*#-!96K&%/!8%2;!&!72;;2#!+&($L!,5$%$+1!
%$/97*#-!9#K&#,$/!7%2((M7296:*#-!8%2;!/%*<$!,2!($#($!NO$8?!P@Q?!!
Another structure used for MEMS gyroscopes is a vibrating plate, which can be
in round or rectangular shape. The plate is suspended by spring structures such
as folded
beams.
actuator makes this structure vibrate at a specific frequency
2.4.2.2 Vibrating
Plate
MEMSAn
Gyros
and phase. This vibration can be in an in-plane direction (x-axis), in which case
=%&6$%!R&+2%&,2%1'(!S9#*#-!T2%U!01%2MV!3ST0MV4!(52K#!*#!T*-9%$!AW!72#(*(,(!28!,K2!(*:*72#!6%228!;&((!6:&,$(!
a rotation normal to the plane (in the z-axis)
causes the device to vibrate in the
=,>+34126,<6?+#6@+./A6BC+(4+96D,E4+36F,1*G6H(E7
(9(6$#/$/!2<$%!&!-:&((!(9+(,%&,$!+1!82:/$/!+$&;(!&#/!<*+%&,*#-!*#M6:&#$!AX@!/$-!29,!28!65&($?!S5*(!/$(*-#!*(!
other in-plane direction (y-axis), inducing for example a change of capacitance as
&:(2!%$8$%%$/!,2!&(!&!/29+:$M$#/$/!ST0?!=*;$#(*2#(!&%$!2#!,5$!2%/$%!28!Y@@!J!W@@!Z;?!S5$($!&%$!&:(2!*#M6:&#$!
described in section 2.1.2. Fig. 2.7 and 2.8 show examples of in plane vibrating
-1%2(?! S5$! 29,M28M6:&#$!
gyroscopes ($#($!
[1, 4] .;2,*2#! *#/97$/! +1! ,5$! [2%*2:*(! 82%7$! *(! /$,$7,$/! +1! 75&#-$(! *#! 7&6&7*,&#7$!

A+

Inertial Navigation Sensors

+$,K$$#!,5$!6%228!;&((!&#/!,5$!(9+(,%&,$(?!T2%!&!,16*7&:!\]\G!-1%2!28!,5*(!,16$L!&!AM%&/B(!3*#M6:&#$4!*#69,!%&,$!
MX
%$(9:,(! *#! &! 82%7$! 28! ^_! J! A@ ! `! 2#! ,5$! 6%228! ;&((L! ^A! J! A@M_! ;! 28! 6$&U! ;2,*2#! 6$%6$#/*79:&%! ,2! ,5$! ($#($!
$:$7,%2/$(L!^Y!&T!3A@MAX4!6$&U!75&#-$!*#!7&6&7*,&#7$?!\$&(9%*#-!A!/$-B5!%$I9*%$(!%$(2:<*#-!;2,*2#(!28!^P!J!A@MAP!
;! &#/! &+29,! @?VP! $:$7,%2#(! 6$%! 717:$! 28! ;2,2%! ;2,*2#?! S5*(! ,$75#2:2-1! 5&(! +$$#! ,%&#(8$%%$/! ,2! C2#$1K$::?!
a$%82%;&#7$! /&,&! *#/*7&,$! ,5&,! ,5$! ST0! 79%%$#,:1! 6$%82%;(! &,! :$<$:(! *#! ,5$! Y! ,2! P@! /$-B5! %&#-$!!
3YL!72;6$#(&,$/4L!2<$%!,$;6$%&,9%$!%&#-$(!28!MW@b[!,2!XPb[!82%!;&#1!;2#,5(!&#/!2<$%!(527U!*#69,(!28!96!,2!
AVL@@@! -?! S5$($! 5&<$! +$$#! $<&:9&,$/! *#! +2,5! ,5$! ]J,$#/$/! O&#-$! 09*/$/! \9#*,*2#! =$;2#(,%&,*2#! &#/! ,5$!
[2;6$,$#,! \9#*,*2#(! >/<&#7$/! S$75#2:2-1! =$;2#(,%&,*2#! 3[\>S=4! 09*/$/! >%,*::$%1! G5$::! NO$8?! PAQ?! S5$!
=%&6$%BC2#$1K$::! ST0! ($%*$(! *(! &! 6%2<$#! /$(*-#! 82%! 5*-5M-! &66:*7&,*2#(! &#/! 5&(! 9#/$%-2#$! ;&#1! *,$%&,*2#(!
:
*#72%62%&,*#-!6$%82%;&#7$M$#5&#7*#-!8$&,9%$(!&#/!8&+%*7&,*2#!*;6%2<$;$#,(?!S5$!<*+%&,*#-!6:&,$!,$75#2:2-1!*(!
@
9($/!*#!C2#$1K$::'(!C0A_@@L!A_Y@L!&#/!A_W@!.\c(d!,5$!:&,,$%!+$*#-!V!79!*#!3YY!774?!!

Fs = 2m v !:

Figure 14: Top view of MEMS vibrating plate gyroscope (TFG-2).

Figure 2.7: Draper Laboratorys TFG-2,

Figure 2.8: Boschs DRS-MM2 con-5#6$$&
7)4+,8096:.;.<)
which
consists
of
two
silicon
proof
mass
of7(+0$%-+2)!
an in-plane
disk.
"#$%$! &%$! '&()! *+(,-! ./! 0+1%&2+(3!
45&2$! 3)%.-! ,%+0$(! 1)!
2#$! 6.'1! ,%+0$! +(0$(2$,!sists
1)! 2#$!
./! vibrating
!"#$$#!%$!
&'()*+,+-./+01.(23*4*5,000000$6$7%8!$7%%
()*+,- ./0 /./,12134(1
plates vibrating in an in plane-direction
It detects a change in orientation
8&5+/.%(+&9!:$%*$5$);!<&()!./!2#$!6.(/+3=%&2+.(-!#&0$!1$$(!,$-+3($,!2.!'+(+'+>$!6.=45+(3!1$2?$$(!-$(-$!&(,!
,%+0$;!@.'$!&%$!+(A45&($!&(,!-.'$!&%$!>A&B+-!3)%.-C!-.'$!&%$!.-6+55&2+(3!6+%6=5&%!,+-*-;!@2=,+$-!+(,+6&2$!2#&2!
and 180 out of phase. Variation of the
in a perpendicular direction capaci2#$! .42+'&5! 3)%.! 4$%/.%'&(6$!
+-! &6#+$0$,!
&2! &! 2#+6*($--!
1$2?$$(!in
DE!orien&(,! FEE! G';!
H'4$%/$62+.(-!
+(! electrodes
2#$!
vibration
direction
due to./!change
tively
through
placed on
<I<@! /&1%+6&2+.(! 4%.6$--! 6&(! $&-+5)! +(2%.,=6$! =(?&(2$,! 4$%/.%'&(6$! $%%.%-9! -.! 6.(2+(=$,! $0.5=2+.(! ./!
tation
in
the
direction
normal
to
the
plane
the
plane
of
the
device.
&,0&(6$,! 4%.6$--$-! 2.! 1=+5,! 2#+6*$%9! '.%$! JA,+'$(-+.(&5! 4&%2-! 2#&2! &%$! 5$--! -=-6$42+15$! 2.! /&1%+6&2+.(!
is measured capacitively.
2.5$%&(6$-!+-!6%+2+6&5!2.!2#$!4$%/.%'&(6$!&(,!6.-2!2&%3$2-;!K(&5.3!L$0+6$-!(.?!#&-!&!6.''$%6+&55)!&0&+5&15$!
KLMN@! 3)%.! ?#.-$! -$(-$! &(,! ,%+0$! &B$-! &%$! 1.2#! 4&%&55$5! 2.! 2#$! -=1-2%&2$9! ?#+6#! &55.?-! .4$%&2+.(! +(! .($!
&2'.-4#$%$!./!3&-9!1=2!&2!5+'+2$,!4$%/.%'&(6$;!!

There are several other structures possible, such as single vibrating beams or viO2#$%!2)4$-!./!0+1%&2+(3!45&2$!<I<@!3)%.-!2#&2!,.!(.2!%$5)!.(!2#$!6.'1!,%+0$!#&0$!1$$(!,$0$5.4$,;!"#$-$!
disks
which
have different
properties
due,%+0$;!
to their
mass distribution and the
,$0+6$-! ,.! (.2! %$P=+%$! -=6#!brating
(&%%.?! 3&4-!
&(,!
2+3#2! /&1%+6&2+.(!
2.5$%&(6$-!
&-! 2#$! 6.'1!
Q$2! R%.4=5-+.(!
S&1T-! UQRSV! <I<@! 3)%.! WN$/;!
?#+6#! &!of
XALOZ!
%$-.(&2+(3!
65.0$%! -#&4$9!
-=-4$(,$,!
/.=%! principle is the
wayDXY9!
the+(!change
frequency
is [A5$&/!
measured.
However,
the 1)!
working
2
-4%+(3-!&(,!6.(2&+(+(3!&!0$%2+6&5!4.-2!4%.0+,+(3!2#$!'&+(!+($%2+&5!'&--9!+-!,%+0$(!+(!&!%.6*+(3!'.2+.(!&1.=2!&(!
same,
which
is
why
it
wont
be
described
in
detail
here
.
2 -45&($!
16 ./! 2#$! 65.0$%5$&/;! "#+-! +-! &(! .=2A./A45&($! 3)%.! U+;$;9! +2! %$-4.(,-! 2.! %&2$! &1.=2! 2#$! >A&B+-!
RTO-EN-SET-116(2011)
&B+-! +(! 2#$!
4$%4$(,+6=5&%! 2.! 2#$! 45&($! ./! 2#$! 65.0$%! 5$&/V;! K! ,.=15$! 3+'1&5! -2%=62=%$! ,%+0$(! &(,! -$(-$,!
$5$62%.'&3($2+6&55)! #&-! 1$$(! ,$0$5.4$,! +(! Q&4&(! WN$/;! DJY;! @$(-.(.%! "$6#(.5.3+$-! U\.%?&)V! +-! ,$0$5.4+(3!
2 for more details on e.g. the principle of a resonant ring gyro, please refer to [1, p. 202ff]
2#$! @KNDEE! (.0$59! #+3#A4%$6+-+.(!
<I<@! :=22$%/5)! 3)%.9! ,$-+3($,! 2.! &6#+$0$! &(! KN]! ./! E;EEX! ,$3^#9!!
+(A%=(!1+&-!-2&1+5+2)!./!E;E[!,$3^#9!&(,!1+&-!%$4$&2&1+5+2)!./!E;F!,$3^#!WN$/;!D[Y;!"#$!%&2$!-$(-+2+0$!&B+-!./!2#$!
@KNDEE! 5+$-! +(A45&($! ?+2#! =44$%! &(,! 5.?$%! -$(-$! 45&2$-! 2#&29! &-+,$! /%.'! +(6%$&-+(3! -$(-+2+0+2)9! &55.?! /.%!
2=(+(3!./!2#$!-$(-$!&(,!,%+0$!%$-.(&(6$-!&(,!&62+0$!6.'4$(-&2+.(!./!2#$!P=&,%&2=%$!.//-$2;!

>*+(20;,)*+(*<.7B.(*3C01,<.

2.4.2.3

Resonant Ring MEMS Gyros

N$-.(&(2!%+(3!<I<@!3)%.-6.4$-!#&0$!&(!&,0&(2&3$!+(!2#&2!2#$!%+(3!-2%=62=%$!'&+(2&+(-!2#$!,%+0$!&(,!-$(-$!
0+1%&2+.(&5!$($%3)!&55!+(!.($!45&($;!_.?$0$%9!2#$%$!+-!&5-.!&!,+-&,0&(2&3$!+(!2#&2!2#$!%+(3!#&-!&!5.?!0+1%&2+(3!
'&--! &(,! #$(6$! 5.?$%! -6&5$! /&62.%;! Z+3=%$! FDU&V! -#.?-! &! -+(35$A6%)-2&5! -+5+6.(! 0+1%&2+(3! %+(3! 3)%.! /%.'! 7;!

2.3. Inertial measurement units

2.3
2.3.1

Inertial measurement units

Definition and purpose of an IMU

An inertial measurement unit (IMU) is a combination of different inertial sensors,usually three linear accelerometers and three gyroscopes, which provides a 3
dimensional measure of the systems orientation and motion. Such units are used
for inertial navigation purposes, e.g. in rockets or satellites, to determine the position of an object. They are sometimes combined with positioning systems (GPS)
to have more precise information.
IMUs based on MEMS sensors are strap-down systems, which means the sensors
orientation depends of the orientation of the object it is on. Theoretically, all types
of previously shown MEMS inertial sensors can be combined in an IMU. However,
to win space, most MEMS IMUs designs combine two in-plane accelerometers and
gyroscopes (x- and y-axis) with an out-of-plane accelerometer and gyroscope (zaxis), which permits to place all sensors on a single chip.

2.3.2

Algorithms

As opposed to stable platform inertial navigation systems, in strap-down inertial

navigation technology, the output signal of the gyroscope, i.e. the orientation of the
object, has to be implemented
accelerometer
algorithm since the direction
Figureinto
2: Athe
stable
platform IMU.
Figure 2: A stable platform IMU.
of the acceleration must be updated if the object changes its orientation [1]. Both
algorithms can be seen in Fig. 2.9 and 2.10.

Figure 3:
3: Stable
Stable platform
platform inertial
inertial navigation
navigation algorithm.
algorithm.
Figure

Figure 2.9: Model of stable platform inertial navigation algorithm, from [5].

Figure 4:
4: Strapdown
Strapdown inertial
inertial navigation
navigation algorithm.
algorithm.
Figure
Figure 2.10: Model of strap-down inertial navigation algorithm, from [5].

66

Chapter 2. Working principles

10

The implementation of the gyroscopes output signal into the algorithm results in
adding the gyroscope error to the one of the accelerometer. This specific problem of
strap-down inertial systems may decrease the accuracy of the inertial measurement
unit significantly compared to a similar stable platform system, since the largest
errors in MEMS inertial technology are usually originated by the gyroscope, as
shown in section 3.2.3.

Chapter 3

Performance and applications

3.1

MEMS inertial sensors error characteristics

The total bias of a sensor is usually defined as the average output signal that has
no correlation with the input signal, i. e. the acceleration or rotation, for specific
operation conditions and a specific time [6]. It is generally expressed in degree
per hour (deg/h) for a gyroscope and in meter per second square (m/s2 ) or g
(1g 9.80665m/s2 ) for an accelerometer. Additionally to the bias comes noise,
which can change the output value and add an additional error to the sensor.

3.1.1

Bias offset and drift

The bias offset of a sensor is defined as the value of the output signal when the
input signal is zero. For an accelerometer, it would therefore be the acceleration
given by the sensor when it is not actually moving; for a gyroscope, the angular
rotation given when the sensor is not undergoing any rotation.
Basically, a change in any physical property such as pressure, temperature or height
can induce such a bias. Nevertheless, for MEMS inertial sensors, temperature variation, wether it is due to the environment or to the heating of the sensor itself, is
the main cause of bias. Because of the many physical properties depending on the
temperature, the bias caused by temperature fluctuation is almost always nonlinear
to the temperature change itself, which means it is difficult to correct. However,
many IMUs 1 contain temperature sensors which are used to correct those bias
directly [5].
The problem of inertial sensors is that the input signals are time integrated, as
can be seen in Figure 2.10 : a constant bias of  therefore causes an error which
grows linearly with time for a gyroscope, i.e. f (t) = t and quadratically for an accelerometer, i.e. xf (t) = 21 t2 [5] . This means for a 100g bias in an accelerometer,
the error in position results in 0.05m after 10 seconds and 500 m after 1000 seconds
2
. The bias of a gyroscope creates an even more important position error, since
it creates second order errors in velocity and third order errors in position when
combined with the accelerometer. This means that for e.g. a 0.2deg/h gyroscope
bias, the final error in position is 0.0016m after 10 seconds, and grows to 1600m
after 1000 seconds [6] . The error due to the accumulation of small bias over time
is called bias drift.
1 e.g.

the Xsens Mti or the ADIS 16488 from Analog Devices (see table 3.4).
for 1000s : xf (1000) = 1/2 100 10 106 10002 = 0.05m where g = 10m/s2 is

2 calculation

assumed

11

Chapter 3. Performance and applications

3.1.2

12

Noise

Noise is an additional signal that interferes with the output signal of the sensor.
It may come from other sensors or from the sensor itself, but it is present in any
sensor and difficult to characterize. Since it is not systematic, noise can not be
removed from the data directly and a stochastic modeling of the noise is necessary
beforehand. Integrating a white noise with a constant standard deviation 0 one
time, i.e. as it is the case for the output of the gyroscope or for the velocity, gives
a zero-mean random walk with a standard deviation that grows proportionally to
the square root of time, and integrating it twice, as it is the case for the position
error resulting of the accelerometer noise, gives a second-order zero-mean random
walk with a standard deviation linear to t3/2 [5] .
Fig. 3.1 shows a measurement made on 1000 identical gyroscopes by the company
crossbow for the same noisy signal. Those sensors have an angle random walk
(ARW) 3 of 0.99 deg/ sec. The resulting distribution, after 1000 seconds, should
therefore have a standard deviation of 31.5 degrees, which
appears
to be Walk
the case
Angle
Random
here.
300

250

200

150

100

50

0
-150

-100

-50

50

100

150

Endpoint (deg)

Figure 3a. 1000 trials, integrating a noise rate

sensor for 1000

Figure 3b. The distribution of endpoints

for the 1000 trials.

Figure 3.1: Random walk of 1000 identical gyroscopes as a function of time. On the
right, the final distribution, i.e. after 1000s, of the output values of the gyroscopes
We can clearly see the same characteristics of the random walk that we saw on the football field. Figure 3
is given
(reprinted from [7]).
on the left shows how the distribution widens with time, and on the right how the distribution falls into a
bell curve.

3.1.3
modeling
We can Stochastic
make a quantitative statement
about the distribution of the end points for this sensor.
1/2

The sensor
has an ARW of 0.99 deg/sec . So after 1 second, the standard deviation of the distribution will be about 1
degree; after
seconds,
about 9.9 of
degrees;
and after
1000therefore
seconds, about
31.5 degrees.
will be the its
To study
the 100
noise
influence
a sensor
and
being
able toThis
categorize
same whether the sensor is moving, or sitting still. Without some other angle reference, this will be a
performances,
stochastic modeling techniques have to be used. In this section, the
fundamental uncertainty in the result of the angle calculation.

two most important stochastic modeling techniques and their purpose are briefly
Notes: For
Converting
Angle Random
Walkstochastic
and PSD/FFT
Noise Values
depicted.
more information
about
modeling
techniques applied to
inertial sensors, please refer to [8].
Different manufacturers will quote noise specifications in different ways. Some will quote an angle
random walk (ARW); some will quote a PSD or FFT noise density; some will quote a total noise, one or
three sigma variation in the output of the sensor. Below are some methods to convert between the various
PSD
specifications. See IEEE Std. 952-1997 C.1.1 for more complete discussion of this.

ThePSD
power
spectral density (PSD) is the most common tool used to analyze data,
? ARW
especially periodic signals. It gives
the periodicity of an output signal for different
&, ) 2
#
1
frequencies.
The
two-sided
PSD
S()
ARW / hr =
PSD$* ' Hz ! corresponds to the Fourrier transform of the
60
hr
!
covariance K( ) [8] :
%$+ (
Z" +
S() =
K( )ej d
(3.1)
FFT ? ARW

1
&, )
#
(
)
FFT $* ' Hz !
the angle random60walk is+ahrcurrently
given value for gyroscopes It is simply defined as the
(
ARW / hr =

"

standard deviation of the gyroscope output for a white noise input, i.e. a first order random walk
afters,1BW
second
and corresponds to the proportionality factor between this standard deviation and
? ARW
the square root of time

ARW / hr =

1 , )
1
!* ',
60 + hr ( BW ( Hz )

where s is the standard deviation of the signal, and BW is the effective bandwidth of the sensor in Hz. This
creates an estimate of the noise density that is then used to estimate the angle random walk.

Page 3

expressions of noise are shown together with Allan variance expressions in Chapter Four.
The typical characteristic slopes are shown in Figure (3.9), where the actual units and
13
3.1. MEMS inertial sensors error characteristics
frequency range are hypothetical. With real data, gradual transitions would exist between
different
PSD slopes
(IEEE
the input,
sharp transitions
in Figure
Athe
useful
property
of the
PSDStd1293-1998),
is that for a rather
whitethan
noise
the output
power
spectral density can give directly the transfer function of the system. The PSD of
(3.9); and the slopes might be different than 2, -1, 0, and +2 values in Figure (3.9). A
a random process usually gives linear log-log slopes corresponding to the powers of
frequencies.
This means the different random processes such as noise or bias drift
certain amount of noise or hash would exist in the plot curve due to the uncertainty of the
are represented through straight lines, wich have different slopes [6] [8].
measured PSD.

Figure
3.9 Slopes
Hypothetical
Gyro in Single-sided
PSD
(after
IEEE processes
Std952-1997)
Figure
3.2:
and appearance
frequencies
of Form
various
random
for a
hypothetical gyro in single-sided PSD form, from [8].
3.4.2.3 TEST RESULTS

These characteristics can be used to analyze random processes, for instance the bias
The same data sets used in section 3.3.2 are used here for power spectral density analysis.
instability or the angle random walk of a gyroscope. The resulting PSD obtained as
aApplying
function the
of the
frequency
is usuallypreviously,
averaged using
frequency
techniques,
PSD
method described
the PSD
result onaveraging
log-log plot
is shown
which enable a clear visible slope. An example of such an analysisis shown in
Fig.
3.3, which
shows
e.g. anXangle
random
of about
0.0015deg
in Figure
(3.10)
for CIMU
-axis gyro
data.walk
Because
of the
bunching/ ofh [6].
the high
frequency data points in the log-log plot, it is difficult to identify noise terms and obtain
parameters in such conditions. Hence, the frequency averaging technique (IEEE Std
66

Figure
CIMU
X-Gyro
Results gyro
with Frequency
Averaging
Technique
Figure
3.3:3.11
PSD
output
for a PSD
real MEMS
after frequency
averaging
techniques,
from [6].

Chapter 3. Performance and applications

14

Allan Variance
Allan Variance is a procedure first defined to analyze the rendering of high precision
oscillators [9]. It has later on been applied more generally for the study of oscillator
stability, and can be used quite efficiently to determine the stability and random
2
drift characterization of MEMS inertial sensors [10]. The allan variance
( )
describes the frequency stability of a random process, i.e. the variance of the change
of frequency value between two observations done over a certain sample period . It
can be calculated from the PSD estimation with the formula given in equation 3.2,
but there is no inverse formula [8].

( ) = 4

S (f )
0

sin4 (f )
df
(f )2

(3.2)

Similarly to PSD, allan variance is used to analyze different random processes of

inertial sensors by using the different slopes in a log-log scaled plot, as shown in
Fig. 3.4.
"###
$%&!'()*+'',

"###!$-./0.10!$2#3"4"3.-"5/!4516.-!78"0#!./0!-#$-!2153#081#

GB+

"" !$!"%&#$

'

()*

++
,

GBG+

/#

() (
(

.$

1& 2

GBGG+

(
()(
0#

- # ()((.$ #

(.$

GBGGG+
GBG+

GB+

+G

+GG

+GGG

!!"#$
345678!-)*9:;<=8>4?8!78@78?8AB<B4CA!CD!#E@CB#8B4=<;!57EC!4A!F;;<A!G<74<A=8!DC7H

Figure 3.4: Slopes of various random processes for a hypothetical gyro in an Allan
variance plot from [8].
+GBG

2
K%& D' (&$ &#' & IJ)

20 2
*

3.1.4

+BG

Data filtering
2

2*2
'2
L

-2
GB+filter4 is a mathematical algorithm
The Kalman
providing an optimized output for
*
a noisy input signal by using a predictive model. The predictive control system is
2
a copy of the
studied system, which estimates how the answer
should be without
2/
GBG+
the noise or error created by the actual sensor. Using aiding sensors which give
additional information to the system, it provides a more observable system than
the original.
GBGG+ By averaging the output value of the real control system and the
predictive GBGGGGGG+
control system,
an optimalGBGGGG+
signal can beGBGGG+
obtained [6,GBGG+
p. 43ff.].
GBGGGGG+
GBG+

D!"IJ$
4 also

345678!-)M9:48=8>4?8!78@78?8AB<B4CA!CD!#E@CB#8B4=<;!5E7C!4A!?4A5;8N?4O8O!:PQ!DC7H

called linear quadratic estimation (LQE)

!! !

velocity vector is then time integrated, yielding the position vector. These steps are
continuously iterated throughout the navigation process (Verplaetse 1995). Figure 1.1
shows this concept in a schematic form. This procedure is, usually, considered as IMU
mechanization. The mechanization
results will
be classic
fed into inertial
the Kalman
filterperformances
to correct
3.2. Comparison
with
sensor

15

inertial sensor errors for best estimation solution.

1.1 Inertial
Navigation
Schematic
Plot (after
El-Sheimy
2003)
Figure 3.5: Figure
Schematic
plot of
a, inertial
navigation
algorithm
for an
IMU using a
Kalman filter, from [6].
3

The aiding sensors used for the Kalman filter can be temperature and pressure
sensors, but also magnetometers or vision-based navigation algorithm, which use a
change of the environment to determine their position. Another often used solution
is the combination of IMUs with a geostationary positioning system (GPS) to obtain
more precise information on the position and orientation of the studied system [11].

3.2

Comparison with classic inertial sensor performances

3.2.1

Common performance criteria

In the following common performance parameters used to describe and compare

sensors, and more specifically inertial sensors, are defined.
Range
The range of a sensor is defined as the set of all the possible output values. For an
accelerometer, it would therefore be defined as the acceleration values that can be
measured with this sensor with the given accuracy.
Accuracy
The accuracy of a sensor is defined as the degree of closeness of the measured value
to the real value. It varies from one sensor to another due to drift or noise, and is
inversely proportional to the maximal error or bias 5 of the sensor.
Resolution
The resolution of a sensor corresponds to the smallest measurable input signal.
Usually, a signal cant be measured when the noise to signal ratio approaches 1, i.e.
when the sensor cant distinct it from noise.
5 see

section 3.1

Chapter 3. Performance and applications

16

Bandwidth
The bandwith of a sensor is a signal processing term which refers to the range of
the frequencies that can be measured (usually in Hz or rad/s).
Sensitivity
The sensitivity of a system is generally defined as the ratio between the output signal
and the input signal. The higher the sensitivity, the easier a change in the input
signal (which can result from a change in acceleration or orientation) is measured.
However, increasing the sensitivity of a sensor usually decreases its accuracy, since
the errors are increased as well.
Selectivity
The selectivity of a sensor is its capacity to differentiate the wanted signal from
other present signal. It can be defined as the ratio of the sensor sensitivity for two
different signals.
Nonlinearity
The nonlinearity of a sensor is the actual maximal variation of a constant sensitivity
over time for the total range or scale.
Bias stability/instability
Bias stability can be defined as the potential of the sensor error to stay within a
certain range for a certain time. It is an essential value for inertial sensors, since the
integration steps necessary in the signal processing of these sensors can lead to high
bias instability. Likewise to rate noise density, bias stability/instability is modeled
using stochastic modeling techniques which are described in section 3.1.3.
Repeatability
Repeatability is the potential of the sensor to respond in an identical way, i.e. with
the same output, to a same input signal given the same conditions.
Grades
Inertial sensors are sometimes graded depending on their performances. Those
grades are corresponding to the possible application domain corresponding to the
performance of the sensor. Table 3.1 shows the grades corresponding to different
in-run bias of inertial sensors.
Application Grade
Gyroscope
Accelerometer

Commercial
> 1deg/s
> 50mg

Tactical
1deg/h
1mg

Navigation
0.01deg/h
25g

Strategic
0.001deg/h
1g

Table 3.1: Grades of inertial sensors, from [3].

3.2.2

Accelerometers

One of the main arguments of MEMS accelerometers is the different range there
are able to calculate an acceleration for. This enables their use in many different
application domains, as shown in Fig. 3.6.

17

3.2. Comparison with classic inertial sensor performances

Figure 3.6: Application domains of accelerometers, from [4].

Recent MEMS accelerometers have an excellent price/performance ratio, and their

performances can be in the same range than accelerometers based on previous technologies, which is why many high-precision IMUs contain MEMS accelerometers.
Table 3.2 shows the performances of 2 MEMS accelerometers based on different
principles.

Principle
Prize (USD)
Output signal type
Measured Directions
Size
Weight (grams)
Range (g)
Bandwith
Sensitivity
Sensitivity
change
due to Temperature
(%/ C)
Nonlinearity (% of
Full-scale-output)
Shock survival limit
Offset at 0g
Noise Density
before
filtering (g/ Hz)

R
Kistler miniature Piezobeam
8640A
Piezoelectric ceramic beam creates voltage when vibrating due
to acceleration
not given (low cost)
Analog
1
10.5mm3
3.5
3 versions available : 5, 10,
50
0.5 to 3000 Hz for 5 and 10g
range, 0.5 to 5000 Hz for 50g
1.000 V/g for 5g range, 0.500
V/g for 10 g range, 0.100 V/g for
50g range
0.12 for 5g version, 0,16 for
10g and 50g

Analog Devices ADXL335

Capacitors measure linear displacement of proof-mass
77
Analog
3
4 4 1.45 mm
not given
3.6
0.5 to 1600 Hz for x- and y-axis,
5 Hz to 550 Hz for z-axis
0.300 V/g
0.01

0.3

7 000g
none (no operating current)

10 000g
1.5V on all 3 axis
150106 for x-, y-axis, 300106
for z-axis

not given

Table 3.2: Comparison of values given by the constructor for 2 different MEMS
Accelerometers (data taken directly from the datasheets of the constructors)

Chapter 3. Performance and applications

3.2.3

18

Gyroscopes

Even though the precision of MEMS gyroscopes has been improved in the last
years with the help of batch production techniques and new gyroscope designs,
they remain the biggest problem of MEMS inertial sensing technology and the main
reason why previous technologies such as fiber-optic gyroscopes (FOG) or ring laser
gyroscopes (RLG) are still vastly used in domains where high-precision sensors are
necessary. Todays best MEMS gyroscopes attain a bias stability in the range of
1 /h, which corresponds to a tactical grade.

Analog
Devices
ADXRS453
Technology

1 MEMS gyro

Prize (USD)

70

ST Microelectronics A3G4250D
3 MEMS gyros, 1
Temperature sensor
not given (< 250)

Size

350mm3

4 x 4 x 1.1mm

Range ( /sec)
Sensitivity
( /sec/LSB)

from 300 to 400

0.0125

245
0.00875

0.05 %Full
and range

0.2 %Full scale

Nonlinearity
Temperature Sensitivity
Acceleration Sensitivity ( /sec/g)
Rate
Noise
Density( /sec/ Hz)
Bias Stability /h

scale

KVH DSP-3400
1 Fiber Optic Gyroscope (FOG)
not given (> 2000)
88.9 x 58.42 x 42.54
mm
375
not given
0.15%Full-scale and
range
<6 /h for a change
of max. 1 C/min

not given

0.03 /s/ C

0.01

not given

not given

0.015 at 25 C

0.03 at 25 C

0.0667

16

not given

Table 3.3: Comparison of values given by the constructor for 3 different gyroscopes
: 2 based on MEMS technology and 1 FOG (data taken directly from the datasheets
of the constructors)

3.2.4

MEMS IMUs

Due to the performances of the MEMS inertial sensors, and particularly to the
integration of the gyroscope errors, MEMS IMUs are globally still less performant
than previous IMUs. However, some recent inertial measurement units based on
MEMS technology can be used for navigation. Their prize is almost similar to some
IMUs based on previous technologies, but their reduced size and weight make new
application domains for navigation possible. The price range of MEMS IMUs, which
go from about 4$ for e.g. the LSM330DLC of ST Microelectronics, to more than 10
000$ for some high-precision IMUs, is also what enables their different applications.
In the following table, the main data of 3 MEMS IMUs of different constructors
and with different application domains are listed.

19

3.2. Comparison with classic inertial sensor performances

Prize (USD)
Size
Weight (grams)
Number of Sensors (A
: accelerometer, G: gyros, T : temperature,
M: magnetometer, P:
pressure)
Accelerometer
(g)

Range

Gyroscope
( /sec)

Range

Accelerometer
tivity (g/LSB)

Sensi-

Gyroscope Sensitivity
( /sec/LSB)
Accelerometer Noise
Density
before filtering
(g/ Hz)
Gyroscope Noise Density before
filtering

( /sec/ Hz)
Gyroscope Bias Stability
Signal processing

Applications

Invensense
MPU
6000
15
4 4 0.9mm
not given
3A, 3G, 1T

2, 4, 8, 16
selectable
250,
500,
1000,
2000
selectable
from 6.10 105
for 2g range to
4.88 104 for 16g
range
from 0.00763 for
250 /sec to 0.061
for 2000 /sec
4104 at 10Hz

YEI 3-Space Sensor

250
35 50 15mm
17
3A, 3G, 1T, 3M

2, 4,
lectable

8 se-

Analog
Devices
ADIS 16488
1700
47 44 14 mm
not given
3A, 3G, 1T, 3M, 1P

18

250,500,2000
selectable

from 450 to 480

from 2.4 104 for

2g range to 9.6
104 for 8g range

1.221108

from 0.00875 for

250 /sec to 0.070
for 2000 /sec
9.9105 at 10Hz

3.052 107
6.7105 at 25Hz

0.005 at 10Hz

0.03 at 10Hz

0.0066 at 25Hz

not given

11 /h average at
25 C

6.25 /h

Programmable lowpass filters

Kalman filtering

Kalman filtering

Motion
Control,
Immersive
Simmulations,
Image
Stabilization,
Pedestrian
Navigation, Toys

Robotics,
Motion
capture,
Positioning
and
stabilization, Personnel navigation
and
tracking,
Unmanned
vehicle
navigation,
Healthcare
monitoring,
Motion
control, Immersive
simulations

Platform stabilization,
Navigation,
Personnel
tracking,
Instrument,
Robotics

Table 3.4: Comparison of values given by the constructor for 3 different MEMS
IMUs (data taken directly from the datasheets of the constructors)

Chapter 3. Performance and applications

3.3
3.3.1

20

Future developments
Multi-directional MEMS inertial sensors

A promising breakthrough in MEMS inertial sensing technology would be the use

of multi-directional MEMS inertial sensors, which have the particularity to measure
an acceleration or rotation in several directions at once. This would not only enable even more miniaturization, but also more precise sensors since it would make
the combination of different signals from different sensors to know the direction of
acceleration or rotation obsolete.
An example of such a multi-directional MEMS inertial sensor would be the levitating disk accelerometer, which is currently under research at the University of
Southampton [12] and Berkeley Sensor and Actuator Center. A physical model of
this accelerometer is shown in Fig. 3.7.

Figure 3.7: Physical model of a levitating-disk accelerometer, based on [12].

The proof-mass of the levitating disk is a micro-machined disk which is levitating
between two parts composed each of 4 or more electrodes using electrostatic forces.
The displacement of the proof mass is measured capacitively through a comparison
of the tension over each capacitor. This technology has several advantages over
previous technologies : It enables a measurement of the acceleration in all three
directions and two angles (yaw and pitch) with only one proof mass. It also suppresses the mechanical spring system to which the proof mass is usually fixed, which
was a cause of errors of the sensor since the spring constant varied with time and
physical properties such as temperature or pressure. Here, the spring constant is
linked to the electrostatic forces that levitate the disk, and can be varied depending
on the application of the sensor [12].
Several other types of multi-directional inertial sensors are currently under research
in different companies or universities, such as a levitating sphere concept at Ball
Semiconductor, Tokinec, Inc., Japan, or a levitating spinning disk similar to the
model described above as a basis for a new type of MEMS gyroscope, which was
developed in the DARPA Navigation Grade Integrated Micro Gyroscope initiative
[3, p. 18f].

3.3.2

New applications of MEMS inertial sensors

The never-ending miniaturization of MEMS inertial sensors has opened the possibility for new applications. One often given example is smart ammunition : a
bullet equipped with a MEMS inertial IMU could calculate its position, compare it
to the one of its target, and redirect itself using e.g. small fins on the back of the
bullet. Such possibilities are currently under research in several companies for the
weapon industry6 , the most important problem being the shock resistance of the
6 e.g. at Honeywell, which specializes in producing high-precision inertial sensors for military
and aeronautical use

21

3.3. Future developments

IMU necessary for its survival to the firing of the bullet. Another example of new
possible applications is microrobotics. Robots small enough to be implemented in
someones body have been build7 , and if adding an IMU to these robots to enable
precise navigation is not imaginable today, it might be in the upcoming years.

7 e.g.

at the IRIS Lab at ETHZ

Chapter 3. Performance and applications

22

Chapter 4

Conclusion
4.1

Conclusion

MEMS Inertial sensors have been a real breakthrough compared to previous inertial
sensing technologies in matters of size and price. Although they function with
relatively simple physical principles, they can enable measurements of acceleration
and angular rotation quite precisely. The miniaturization and low cost of inertial
sensors created by the MEMS technology has opened new possibilities and industrial
applications, such as their utilization in toys and smartphones, in small robots or
motion capture. New applications are envisaged in the future in different fields,
from micro-sized robots to smart ammunition.
However, there still are several drawbacks in MEMS inertial sensor performance,
especially for MEMS gyroscopes : Their low selectivity, for instance their high
sensitivity to temperature or pressure, combined with the integration necessary for
a strap-down technology, can lead to high bias drift and create important errors
in position after a certain time. Furthermore, the precision of micromachining
processes is limited, which can induce flaws in the basic structure of the sensor. All
these errors lead to the point that todays MEMS IMUs still are not comparable
in matters of performance to previous technologies, especially due to the MEMS
gyroscopes.
Nevertheless, one should not forget that MEMS inertial sensing technology is a
fairly recent technology, and that increasing the performance and design of MEMS
IMUs remains a very active development area. Another important point is that
the size and price of such an IMU enables their combination with other position
tracking devices, such as GPS, magnetometers or vision-based tracking, which significantly reduce the errors of a inertial measurement navigation system and make
high-precision navigation based on MEMS sensors a reality.

4.2

Acknowledgements

I would like to express my very great appreciation to the tutors of this project,
Janosch Nikolic and Michael Bloesch, who answered all my questions and showed
great support during all the semester. I also would like to thank the whole ASL
lab for enabling me to do this work in ideal conditions, and the ETH library for
providing a calm place to work.

23

Chapter 4. Conclusion

24

Bibliography
[1] D. Titterton, J. Weston: Strapdown Inertial Navigation Technology. The
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, second edition, 2004.
[2] S. Beeby, G. Ensell, M. Kraft, N. White MEMS Mechanical Sensors
Artech House - MEMS Series, pp. 173-208, 2004.
[3] N. M. Barbour: Inertial Navigation Sensors. Nato Report, C. S. Draper
Laboratory, Cambridge, USA,
[4] C. Hierold: Microsystems Technology Lecture, chapters : Transduction Techniques, Micro Resonators and Resonant Microsensors. At ETHZ, Zurich 2012.
[5] O. J. Woodman: An Introduction to inertial navigation. University of Cambridges Computer Laboratory Technical Report, Cambridge 2007.
[6] H. Hou: Modeling inertial sensors errors using Allan variance. M.S. thesis, MMSS Res. Group, Dept. Geomatics Eng., Univ. Calgary, Calgary, AB,
Canada, UCGE Rep. 20201, Sep. 2004.
[7] W. Stockwell:
Angle Random Walk. Crossbow Technology Inc.,
http://www.xbow.com.
[8] IEEE Standard Specification Format Guide and Test Procedure for Single-Axis
Interferometric Fiber Optic Gyros
[9] D. W. Allan: Statistics of Atomic Frequency Standards. Proceedings of the
IEEE, Vol. 54, No. 2, February 1966.
[10] N. El-Sheimy, H. Hou, X. Niu: Analysis and Modeling of Inertial Sensors
using Allan Variance. IEEE transactions on instrumentation and measurement,
vol. 57, NO. 1, 2008
[11] A. Kealy, G. Roberts, G. Retscher: Evaluating the performance of low
cost MEMS inertial sensors for seamless indoor/outdoor navigation. IEEE Position Location and Navigation Symposium, May 2010.
[12] R. Houlihan, M. Kraft: Modeling of an accelerometer based on a levitated
proof mass. Microelectronics Centre, University of Southampton, UK, June
2002.

25