Cargando…
Characterization and Benchmark of a Novel Capacitive and Fluidic Inclination Sensor
In this paper, a fluidic capacitive inclination sensor is presented and compared to three types of silicon-based microelectromechanical system (MEMS) accelerometers. MEMS accelerometers are commonly used for tilt measurement. They can only be manufactured by large companies with clean-room technolog...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8659599/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34884034 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s21238030 |
Sumario: | In this paper, a fluidic capacitive inclination sensor is presented and compared to three types of silicon-based microelectromechanical system (MEMS) accelerometers. MEMS accelerometers are commonly used for tilt measurement. They can only be manufactured by large companies with clean-room technology due to the high requirements during assembly. In contrast, the fluidic sensor can be produced by small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) as well, since only surface mount technologies (SMT) are required. Three different variants of the fluidic sensor were investigated. Two variants using stacked printed circuit boards (PCBs) and one variant with 3D-molded interconnect devices (MIDs) to form the sensor element are presented. Allan deviation, non-repeatability, hysteresis, and offset temperature stability were measured to compare the sensors. Within the fluidic sensors, the PCB variant with two sensor cavities performed best regarding all the measurement results except non-repeatability. Regarding bias stability, white noise, which was determined from the Allan deviation, and hysteresis, the fluidic sensors outperformed the MEMS-based sensors. The accelerometer Analog Devices ADXL355 offers slightly better results regarding offset temperature stability and non-repeatability. The MEMS sensors Bosch BMA280 and TDK InvenSense MPU6500 do not match the performance of fluidic sensors in any category. Their advantages are the favorable price and the smaller package. From the investigations, it can be concluded that the fluidic sensor is competitive in the targeted price range, especially for applications with extended requirements regarding bias stability, noise, and hysteresis. |
---|