Influence of System and Actuator Nonlinearities on the Dynamics of Ring-Type MEMS Gyroscopes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigates the nonlinear dynamic response behavior of a rotating ring that forms an essential element of MEMS (Micro Electro Mechanical Systems) ring-based vibratory gyroscopes that utilize oscillatory nonlinear electrostatic forces. For this purpose, the dynamic behavior due to nonlinear system characteristics and nonlinear external forces was studied in detail. The partial differential equations that represent the ring dynamics are reduced to coupled nonlinear ordinary differential equations by suitable addition of nonlinear mode functions and application of Galerkin’s procedure. Understanding the effects of nonlinear actuator dynamics is essential for characterizing the dynamic behavior of such devices. For this purpose, a suitable theoretical model to generate a nonlinear electrostatic force acting on the MEMS ring structure is formulated. Nonlinear dynamic responses in the driving and sensing directions are examined via time response, phase diagram, and Poincare’s map when the input angular motion and nonlinear electrostatic force are considered simultaneously. The analysis is envisaged to aid ongoing research associated with the fabrication of this type of device and provide design improvements in MEMS ring-based gyroscopes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".