• Skip to main content
  • LOG IN
  • REGISTER
Coventor_New_LogoCoventor_New_LogoCoventor_New_LogoCoventor_New_Logo
  • COMPANY
    • ABOUT
    • CAREERS
    • PRESS RELEASE
    • PRESS COVERAGE
    • EVENTS
  • PRODUCTS
    • SEMulator3D®
      Semiconductor Process Modeling
    • CoventorMP®
      MEMS Design Automation
      • CoventorWare®
      • MEMS+®
  • SOLUTIONS
    • SEMICONDUCTOR SOLUTIONS
    • MEMS SOLUTIONS
  • RESOURCES
    • CASE STUDIES
    • BLOG
    • VIDEOS
  • CONTACT
  • SUPPORT
Contact Us
✕
  • Home
  • Coventor Blog
  • Understanding Q-Factors in Gas Encapsulated MEMS Inertial Sensors
Fig 4a-c: Process model flow of film thickness at the isolated region of  a) 20 nm, b) 10 nm and c) 0 nm with corresponding trench etch depth from bottom of resist.
In situ Metrology for Etch Endpoint Detection
November 8, 2022
Figure 2. Backside power delivery using buried power rails, based on [2] (not to scale).
The Other Side of the Wafer: The Latest Developments in Backside Power Delivery
December 19, 2022

Understanding Q-Factors in Gas Encapsulated MEMS Inertial Sensors

Published by Chris Welham at November 28, 2022
Categories
  • Coventor Blog
Tags
  • CoventorMP
  • MEMS
  • MEMS Inertial Sensors
Figure 1:   3D Gyroscope Model example with simulated pressure contours (left), and ambient cavity pressure vs. Q-factor graph with simulated and measured results (right) (courtesy: Murata)

Figure 1:   3D Gyroscope Model example with simulated pressure contours (left), and ambient cavity pressure vs. Q-factor graph with simulated and measured results (right) (courtesy: Murata)

Here in the Application Team at Coventor, we are always working to improve our solutions to real-world MEMS design problems. We have a continuing interest in packaging that encapsulates MEMS transducers. Generally, the purpose of these packages is to mechanically support the transducer and allow it to access the signals of interest. At the same, the packages provide protection against the environment and can mitigate unwanted effects such as excessive temperatures or mechanical loads [1].

In MEMS, inertial sensors are generally packaged by encapsulating the sensing element in a cavity formed during fabrication. The cavity forms a hermetically sealed chamber. The gas and pressure in the chamber are normally controlled, as both strongly influence the performance of the sensor. Open loop accelerometers, for example, are generally encapsulated at higher pressures to carefully control the sensor bandwidth [2]. Gyroscopes, on the other hand, normally operate over a lower range of cavity pressures, typically less than a few mBar of pressure down to a high vacuum [3].

At this year’s MEMS IEEE Inertial conference in Avignon, France we displayed a poster that described how temperature variations can change the Q-factor of a 3-axis gyroscope. In our example, the gyroscope was encapsulated in a sealed cavity filled with an inert gas. According to the combined gas law, a change in ambient temperature will change the pressure in the cavity, which will also change the Gyroscope Q-factor.

Figure 1:   3D Gyroscope Model example with simulated pressure contours (left), and ambient cavity pressure vs. Q-factor graph with simulated and measured results (right) (courtesy: Murata)

Figure 1:   3D Gyroscope Model example with simulated pressure contours (left), and ambient cavity pressure vs. Q-factor graph with simulated and measured results (right) (courtesy: Murata)

Modeling this effect is not trivial since the Q-factor is itself dependent on the geometry of the cavity that surrounds the gyroscope, as well as the pressure and type of gas in the cavity. This effect can be seen in the simulated squeeze-film damping pressure contours of an example gyroscope model built in CoventorMP®, see Figure 1. As might be expected, the pressure on the large flat plates that form the moving sense mass is high. However, the pressure contour also bleeds over the plates edges where the cavity gas is forced into the channels between the sides of the sensing mass and the cavity.

Incidentally, the Q-factor of this gyro is dominated by the inert gas in the cavity. If there is no gas and the device operates in a high vacuum, the Q-factor is determined by thermo-elastic-damping and anchor damping – which can also be simulated in CoventorMP.

As the graph in Figure 1 shows, our simulation results in CoventorMP provide a good match to the measured data. When our measured data match the simulation results, this is a good indication that the models are working correctly. It is very important to model combined package-device interactions when designing MEMS devices, since performance issues caused by ambient temperature changes or mechanical package loads can degrade the actual performance of the MEMS device.   As seen in our example, CoventorMP can be used to accurately model MEMS device-package interactions to ensure that packaged device performance meets the targeted design specifications.

References

  1. Kim, B., Park, WT. (2012). MEMS Packaging. In: Bhushan, B. (eds) Encyclopedia of Nanotechnology. Springer, Dordrecht.
  2. A research on temperature dependent characteristics of quality factor of silicon MEMS gyroscope, FENG Rui, et. al. Nanjing University of Science and Technology, Nanjing, China Advanced Materials; Vol. 159, pp 399-405.
  3. Damping Ratio Analysis of a Silicon Capacitive Micromechanical Accelerometer, Yuming Mo et al., China Academy of Engineering Physics, Mianyang, China, Wireless Sensor Network;  Vol. 9 No. 5, May 2017.
Share
Chris Welham
Chris Welham
Chris Welham, Ph.D. is the Technical Director of MEMS Applications at Coventor, where he manages Worldwide Application Engineering for Coventor’s MEMS software group. Chris has a BEng in Electronic Engineering and a PhD in Engineering, both from Warwick University. His Ph.D. work was focused on resonant pressure sensors. After obtaining his Ph.D., Chris worked for Druck developing commercial resonant sensors and interface electronics. Chris is based in Coventor's Paris office.

Related posts

Figure 1: A virtual model of a GAA FET showing residual SiGe after the channel release step. Process engineers have to make a trade-off between silicon loss and residual SiGe.(b) Variation in residual SiGe as a function of the channel width and etch lateral ratio. The higher the channel width, the higher the lateral ratio needed to etch away all the SiGe. Channel widths are shown as delta values from the nominal value of 30 nm.

Figure 1: A virtual model of a GAA FET showing residual SiGe after the channel release step. Process engineers have to make a trade-off between silicon loss and residual SiGe.(b) Variation in residual SiGe as a function of the channel width and etch lateral ratio. The higher the channel width, the higher the lateral ratio needed to etch away all the SiGe. Channel widths are shown as delta values from the nominal value of 30 nm.

June 14, 2023

Improving Gate All Around (GAA) Transistor Performance using Virtual Process Window Exploration


Read more - Improving Gate All Around (GAA) Transistor Performance using Virtual Process Window Exploration
Figure 1 displays a single cell of a conventional DRAM that consists of 2 Word Lines (WLs), a Bit Line (BL) and 2 Storage Node Contacts (SNC) in Figure 1(a). There are 3 images in the figure. The Saddle Fin is produced during the WL etch step (prior to WL metal deposition) and is located below the cell wordline (Figure 1(b), right center inside a yellow dotted circle). The Saddle Fin structure can be seen in detail by making a vertical cut in the wordline direction (Fig.1(b), right). During device simulation, the Saddle Fin performance can be measured by virtually cropping a transistor and adding ports at the Gate, Source and Drain after an SNC Process (Fig.1(c), showing the gate, source and drain).
May 30, 2023

Improving DRAM Device Performance Through Saddle Fin Process Optimization


Read more - Improving DRAM Device Performance Through Saddle Fin Process Optimization
Figure 6 (left to right): Different profiles using pattern dependence for the antenna and sharp head shapes. a) Antenna shape with POR flow (b) Antenna profile with a gate CD of 26nm (c) Sharp head profile with a gate CD of 28nm (d) Sharp head profile with an etch.

Figure 6 (left to right): Different profiles using pattern dependence for the antenna and sharp head shapes. a) Antenna shape with POR flow (b) Antenna profile with a gate CD of 26nm (c) Sharp head profile with a gate CD of 28nm (d) Sharp head profile with an etch.

April 13, 2023

The Impact of Metal Gate Recess Profile on Transistor Resistance and Capacitance


Read more - The Impact of Metal Gate Recess Profile on Transistor Resistance and Capacitance
Figure 1a (left) displays the process of performing Physical Vapor Deposition (PVD), including Cu bombardment and filling of voids. Figure 1b (right) displays the process of performing Ion Beam Etch (IBE), including ion beam bombardment, mask shadowing and etch regions.

Fig 1a Physical Vapor Deposition (PVD); Fig 1b Ion Beam Etch (IBE)

March 22, 2023

A Deposition and Etch Technique to Lower Resistance of Semiconductor Metal Lines


Read more - A Deposition and Etch Technique to Lower Resistance of Semiconductor Metal Lines

Comments are closed.

Product Information

  • Product Offerings
  • Technical Support & Training
  • Licensing
  • System Requirements

Resources

  • Blog
  • Case Studies
  • Videos
  • 2018 MEMS Design Contest

Company

  • About
  • Press
  • Partners & Programs
  • Contact
© Copyright Coventor Inc., A Lam Research Company, All Rights Reserved
Privacy Policy • Terms of Use
Contact Us
  • LOG IN
  • REGISTER