Dos 20-4-17
MEMS Design Optimization Techniaques
Muhammad Azeem,Masters’s Student,CEME,NUST, Masood-Ur-Rehman ,Masters’s
Student,CEME,NUST
 Working principle of the STS RF MEMS switch design and
Abstract— This review paper focuses on four of the novel
optimization techniques that are being practiced in mems
research and optimization. The main objective of tis paper
is to provide a thorough review of the topics at hand
provide the reader an overall view of the trends in
optimization that are being followed. We have taken four
techniques and provided the results and optimization
procedures along with their basic operating principals as
well
Index Terms—MEMS (micro electro mechanical systems)
I. INTRODUCTION
O PTIMIZATION is the literal meaning which stands for
improving the perofoamce of any system in such a way
that with the said allocated resources better perfoamnce
accuracy can be mastered, this is called optimization
techniques. In MEMS there is a vast window of optimization
in its different implementation techniques and are being used
in many ways, some of tese are discussed and reviewd in this
paper. Which are as follows explaining there operating
prinicpals and the proposed optimization along with there
results
II. TECHNIQUES REVIEWED
for our review paper we have selected four paper which are
discussed in detail in this section, our main focus was on the
brief overview of these techniques in this section. In this
section all of these techniques are presented and in the later
sections there operating principals and there optimizations
shall be discussed
A. Design of experiments based factorial design and its
response surface methodology for MEMS optimization
In MEMS, RF Switches are widely used. Though there are
advantanteges of MEMS-RF switches over other solide state
devices but there are certain limitations which designers have
to consider.“Symmetric toggle switch” (STS), technique is
proposed, which caters These limitations. Optimization
technique, Design of experiments (DOE) based design
optimization is used in these STS RF-MEMS switches which
reduces computational cost and optimize the complex
geometries.
This paper has been submitted to our teacher for peer review on 20-4-17
1
explaination of the DOE based optimization methodology is
presented in this paper. Plackett–Burman screening design ,
ANOVA, Box-Behnkin based design, and a second order
metamodel is developed to opitimize and screen out the most
significant factors affecting the output response.
B. Design and Optimization of a MEMS Electret-Based
Capacitive Energy Scavenger
Energy scavenging is a process extracting power from ambient
vibrations. There are three classes of electromechanical
converters: inductive, Piezoelectric, and capacitive. The last
class offers a good capability of miniaturization and on-chip
integration, but requires voltage bias.[2]
In this paper, a new method of “capacitive conversion” is
used, Which is focused on a technique proposed by Sterken et
al. which does not require the external voltage bias. In the
optimization process, numerical integration, depending on the
number of free parameters, has been done. The critical step is
the choice of a minimum set of optimization parameters.
Comparison of results with those of the small signal
(linearized) model, based on the case analyzed by Sterken et al
is also shown to validate the proposed method.
C. mproved Differential Evolution Based on Stochastic
ranking for robust layout synthesis of MEMS
components
Here an improved differential evolution (DE) algorithm for robust
layout synthesis of microelectromechanical system components
subject to inherent geometric uncertainties. A case study of the layout
synthesis of a combdriven microresonator shows that the approach
proposed in this paper can lead to design results that meet the target
performance and are less sensitive to geometric uncertainties than the
typical designs. It is also demonstrated that the algorithm proposed in
this paper cannot only obtain better results than the standard DE
algorithm but also outperform some other state-of-the-art algorithms
in constrained optimization.in general MEMS are tiny mechanical
devices that are built upon semiconductor chips and are
measured in micrometers. They usually integrate a number of
functions, including fluidics, optics, mechanics, and
electronics, across different physical domains and are used to
make numerous devices such as pressure sensors, gyroscopes,
engines, accelerometers, etc. Many designs of MEMS are
made through engineering experience and backof- the-
envelope calculations and are highly dependent on the
knowledge and experience of the designers.
Dos 20-4-17 2

D. Optimization of Sensing Stators in Capacitive MEMS

operating at resonance
capacitive sensing stators for microelectromechanical systems
(MEMS) suitably designed to minimize damping effects without
worsening the capacitive variation per unit displacement. Such
optimization can be exploited to jmaximize the readout signal in
resonant systems. Two structures are designed with the aid of finite-
element method models for the electrostatic domain, and with the aid
of a deterministic integral model for damping predictions. The
structures, fabricated in a 22-μm-thick surface micromachining
process, demonstrate a 3× sensitivity improvement when used as
resonant MEMS magnetometers.

III. OPERATING PRINCIPAL

A. Design of experiments based factorial design and
response surface methodology for MEMS optimization
Rangra et al. (2005) and Farinelli et al. (2008) have
presented STS RF MEMS switch designs.[1] These designs
are based on the push-pull mechanism, fabricated through
FBK-irst MEMS process using gold structural layer. Figure 1
shows the schematic diagram and working principle of the
symmetric toggle micromachined switch. The inner and outer
pairs of the actuation electrodes of the two microactuators are
electrically shortened by polysilicon lines and are called “pull-
in” and “pull-out” electrodes respectively. The pull-in
electrodes when biased to a voltage greater than the pull-in
threshold voltage, bring the center area of the beam in contact
with the oxide layer on the transmission line. This results the
switch in off-state. The switch is in on state when the voltage
is applied on the pull-out electrodes.
Fig. 2. The electret-based capacitive converter: reference structure (top view) and
charge exchange through C1 and C2 (side view).
C. Optimization on tochastic Ranking for Robust Layout
Synthesis of MEMS Components
This paper considers the application of a general robust
optimization problem that can be formulated as the following
Let x = {x1, x2 . . . , xn} be an array of design variables of a
given design problem. We assume that the uncertainty δ =
{δ1, δ2, . . . , δn} can be characterized as a random vector with
the following statistics:
where Ω is the covariance matrix and is positive semidefinite.
If the uncertainties are uncorrelated, then Ω is diagonal;
otherwise, the off-diagonal entries are nonzero when
correlation exists. Given a function f(x,δ ) describing the
performance of a design merit, the robust design problem that
we aim to solve is to minimize the expected value of the
squared error between the actual and target performances.[4]

D. Optimization of Sensing Stators in Capacitive MEMS

Fig. 1. Schematic of the symmetric toggle RF MEMS switch
B. Design of experiments based factorial design and
response surface methodology for MEMS optimization
The working principle is shown in the schematic of the
converter, as shown in Fig. 2. It uses an electret
sandwichedbetween two electrodes, one fixed (B, the
substrate) and theother (A, the proof mass) actuated by
ambient vibrations. Vibrations cause a flow of charge between
the fixed electrode B and the two variable capacitors C1 and
C2. [2]
Operating at Resonance
The purpose of this work is to study alternative topologies
which improve the mechanical sensitivity x/F through a
reduction in the damping coefficient, without acting on the
pressure of the package in order to avoid the mentioned
fabrication and packaging issues. Indeed, with a suitable
change in the geometry of the sensing stators, the damping
coefficient is lowered, leading to an improvement of the
quality factor. This is obtained without worsening the
electrostatic sensitivity C/x, thus guaranteeing a higher overall
sensitivity.[3]
The geometry is optimized through a segmentation of the
stators (Figure. 3), which considerably decreases the
mechanical dissipation while preserving the capacitance
variation per unit displacement [5]. The mechanical
dissipation (i.e. the damping coefficient) is reduced by
allowing an escape route for air molecules present in the gap
between the rotor and the stators. Furthermore, for
Dos 20-4-17
Fig. 3. Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) pictures of the two structures
technological reasons, this principle is verified with two
suitable structures, formed by a clampedclamped beam (rotor)
and properly designed stators.
IV. OPTIMIZATION TECHNIQUES
A. Design of experiments based factorial design and
response surface methodology for MEMS optimization
1) Placket–Burman screening design
The design variables (control factors) considered for the
design optimization, are top electrode length (TEL), top
electrode width (TEW), torsion spring length (TSL), torsion
spring width (TSW), connecting lever length (CLL),
connecting lever width (CLW), central bridge length (CBL)
and central bridge width (CBW). At the early design
optimization stage, Placket–Burman design is used to screen
out the most important factors affecting the output response. It
is assumed that the important main effects will be much larger
than the two factor interactions. Each factor is coded at two
levels, 1 for the low level and the +1 for the high level. The
control factor low and high levels and their respective codes
are shown in Table 1.
3
2) Analysis of variance for Placket–Burman design
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) is carried to study the effect
of the control factors (X1, X2, X3, X4, X5, X6, X7, X8) on the
output response. ANOVA assumes that the sources of
variabilityin the response variable can be attributed to the
factors aswell as to the random noise. This analysis helps to
determine: (1) which factor have the significant effect on the
response (2) how much variability in response is attributed to
each factor.
3) Response surface methodology
The significant factors (TEL, TEW, TSL, TSW), identified by
Plackett–Burman based screening design are further explored
by the response surface method. Response surface method
uses a statistical and mathematical techniques to develop an
empirically-based model of the observed response value
(dependent variable), and number of associated factors
(independent variables). General model of RSM is given by:
y = f ′(x)β + ε (1)
where x = x1, x2, . . . , xk , f (x) is vector function of p elements
that consists of the powers and cross products of power of x1,
x2, . . . , xk up to certain degrees represented by d(≥)1, β is a
vector of p unknown constant coefficients often referred as
parameters and ε is random experimental error assumed to
have zero mean. Output response y is measured for a series of
n experiments with specific settings of the independent
variables x1, x2, . . . , xk. The totality of these settings define
the so called response surface design which is represented by a
matrix of n × k, called the design or model matrix, given by
where xui denotes the uth design setting of xi (i = 1, 2, . . . , k :
u = 1, 2, . . . , n). Each row of D represents a point, referred as
a design point in a k-dimensional Eculidean space. For the yu
being the response value obtained as a result of applying the
uth setting of x, namely xu = (xu1, xu2, . . . , xuk), (u = 1, 2, . .
. , n, ), Eq. 1 is given as
yu = f´(xu)β + εu. (2)
where εu denotes the error term at the uth experimental run.
Equation (2) in matrix form can be expressed as;
Y = Xβ + ε. (3)
Dos 20-4-17 4

Assuming that ε has zero mean and variance-covariance

matrix, the ordinary least square estimator of β is given by; TABLE 3
BOX- BEHNKEN DESIGN MATRIX AND THE OUTPUT RESPONSE OF 27
βˆ = (XX)−1 XY. (4)
EXPERIMENTAL
Method of least squares regression is used to estimate the
parameters β0, β1, βii and βij, so that the sum of squares of
the predicted values, ˆy(x), from the actual values, y(x), are
minimized.

4) Box–Behnken design

TABLE 2
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR PLACKETT–BURMAN DESIGN

Table 2 shows the three different levels low (−1), medium

(0) and high (+1) for the four significant factors TEL,
TEW, TSL and TSW. Complete Box–Behnkin design
matrix for the four factors with 27 experimental runs and
the output response, obtained through ANSYS simulations,
is shown in Table 3. The other variables CLL, CLW, CBL
and CBW are maintained at a constant level which gave
minimum pull-in voltage in the Plackett–Burman screening
design.

B. Design and Optimization of a MEMS Electret-Based

Capacitive Energy Scavenger
Before starting the design and optimization, we should check
that the electret-based capacitive converter be a suitable
solution for the intended application. This is easily done by
considering the normalized output power,P out , expressed as

the power loss due to damping, and these quantities are given
respectively by:
Dos 20-4-17
C. An example of Design-and-Optimization
The example reported here is based on the case considered by
Sterken et al. in [6,7]. The system is defined by the following
set of fixed parameters:
The vibration source of excitation [7] is a sinusoidal
oscillation with amplitude and frequency , so that a sinusoidal
driving term can be considered with
The maximum of output power is now searched by solving
(6) on a suitable 3-D grid in the space of parameters (this has
been performed using the standard ODE solvers available in
MATLAB. The use of a proper 3-D grid leads to
computational times up to a week on a fast PC running
MATLAB 6.1 forWindows. For the example here reported a
64x64x64 grid in the (w1,R,h ) space has been used. If one
chose to use a higher number of free parameters, the
computational effort would grow tremendously and the
development of an ad hoc numerical technique would
probably be required). Doing so, we find the optimal set of
parameters (which we mark with an asterisk).[2]
Fig. 4. Proof mass displacement (^x) during a complete oscillation of the
external vibration excitation (^y), in the asymptotic regime.
5
Fig. 5. Waveform of the charge on each variable capacitor on a period of
excitation.
V. CONCLUSION
AFTER THE DISCUSSION OF THE DIFFERENT OPTIMIZATION
TECHNIQUES, THERE IS THE BASIC TREND THAT CAN BE SEEN
AND THAT IS THE , POTENTIAL USEFULNESS OF THE ALLOCATED
RESOURCES SUCH AS AREA AND DIMENSIONS THAT HAVE NOT
BEEN CHANGED, BUT STILL OPTIMIZATION HAS BEEN ACHIEVED
THROUGH PERFORMANCE METRICS TUNING SUCH AS VOLTAGE
DIFFERENCES OF PRODUCTION TECHNIQUES THESE ALL CATER
TO THE MORE AFFECTIVE PERFORMANCE AND GRADUAL
INCREASE IN OPTIMIZATION OF THE MEMS DEVICES THE BASIC
NEED OF OPTIMIZATION IS THUS, TO INCREASE THE EFFICIENCY
WITH MINIMAL CHANGES THAT IS IN TRUE WORDS
OPTIMIZATION WITH ENHANCED RESULTS STATISTICALLY AND
PRACTICALLY. THIS IS THE GENERAL CONCLUSION OF THIS
REVIEW PAPER.
REFERENCES
[1] Design of experiments based factorial design and response surface
methodology for MEMS optimization M. M. Saleem · A. Somá
Received: 30 September 2013 / Accepted: 15 April 2014 ©
Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014
[2] JOURNAL OF MICROELECTROMECHANICAL SYSTEMS,
VOL. 14, NO. 3, JUNE 2005 429 Design and Optimization of a
MEMS Electret-Based Capacitive Energy Scavenger Fabio Peano
and Tiziana Tambosso, Senior Member, IEEE
[3] JOURNAL OF MICROELECTROMECHANICAL SYSTEMS,
VOL. 24, NO. 4, AUGUST 2015 1077 Optimization of Sensing
Stators in Capacitive MEMS Operating at Resonance Attilio
Frangi, Giacomo Laghi, Giacomo Langfelder, Paolo Minotti, and
Sarah Zerbini
[4] IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS,
VOL. 56, NO. 4, APRIL 2009 Improved Differential Evolution
Based on Stochastic Ranking for Robust Layout Synthesis of
Dos 20-4-17 6

MEMS Components Zhun Fan, Member, IEEE, Jinchao Liu,

Torben Sørensen, and Pan Wang, Member, IEEE
[5] A. Frangi, B. De Masi, G. Langfelder, and D. Paci, “Optimization of
Lorentz-force MEMS magnetometers using rarefied-gas-theory,”
in Proc.IEEE SENSORS, Nov. 2013, pp. 1–4.
[6] T. Sterken, K. Baert, R. Puers, and S. Borghs, “Power extraction
fromambient vibration,” in Proc. SeSens (Workshop on
Semiconductor Sensors)2002, Nov. 2002, pp. 680–683.
[7] T. Sterken, K. Baert, R. Puers, S. Borghs, and R. Mertens, “A new
power MEMS component with variable capacitance,” in Proc.
2003 Pan Pacific Symposium Conference, Feb. 2003.