Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 54 references

2D PZT MEMS Resonant Scanner Using a Three-Mask Process

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read A two-axis PZT MEMS laser scanner made with only three lithography masks reaches optical scan angles of 11.5° and 4.8° at a 12 V peak-to-peak drive.

desk verdict Solid three-mask 2D PZT scanner demonstration, but the headline Q factors rest on the more favorable of two conflicting measurements and need a quantitative fix. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.24566 v1 pith:B7Q444VL submitted 2025-05-30 eess.SY cs.SY

Mehrdad Khodapanahandeh , Parviz Zolfaghari , Hakan Urey This is my paper
classification eess.SYcs.SY
keywords laserscanningpiezoelectricMEMSPZTthinfilm2Dmicromirrorresonantscannermicrofabricationthree-maskprocessopticalcoherencetomography
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper claims that a two-dimensional resonant laser scanner can be built on a single silicon chip with only three lithography masks, using thin-film PZT (lead zirconate titanate) actuators on both scan axes. The device sweeps a 1 × 1.4 mm oval mirror at 3.6 kHz vertically and 54.2 kHz horizontally, reaching optical scan angles of 4.8° and 11.5° at a 12 V peak-to-peak drive, with quality factors of 750 and 1050 measured in the optical setup. On the bandwidth-efficiency product that scanner papers use to compare devices, the reported values of 24.2 and 623 deg·mm·kHz place this design among the higher 2D PZT scanners in the literature it cites. If those figures hold, the design offers OCT, LiDAR, and display systems a low-voltage, compact scanning element at lower fabrication complexity than the six-mask process it descends from. The paper supports the claim with finite-element analysis, a detailed three-mask fabrication flow, and optical and vibrometer characterization.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the mechanically coupled dual-axis architecture built from three cascaded frames. The outer frame is anchored to the substrate by torsional beams and driven by four PZT cantilevers through folded beams, producing the low-frequency vertical resonance. The middle frame is shaped like four wings, each carrying PZT drive electrodes, and its out-of-phase oscillation with the inner frame produces the high-frequency horizontal resonance. The inner frame carries the 1 × 1.4 mm oval mirror and mechanically isolates it from the torsional flexures, while a 175 µm D-D-shaped silicon rim on the backside stiffens both mirror and outer frame against dynamic deformation. The fabrication route is the three-mask SOI process itself: top-electrode patterning, PZT etch, and a backside deep reactive ion etch that releases the structure, which is the claimed reduction from the six-mask process used in the group's prior scanners.

What would settle it

Drive the same chip in the optical setup at increasing voltages from below 2 V up to 12 V peak-to-peak, and separately repeat the laser-vibrometer frequency sweep with a stiff mount and in vacuum; if the extracted quality factor stays near 300 (vertical) and 643 (horizontal) rather than rising to 750 and 1050, then the headline quality factors and the bandwidth-efficiency products derived from them are measurement artifacts rather than intrinsic device properties.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that mechanically coupling the two scan axes in a three-cascaded-frame structure — an outer frame that resonates on torsional beams for the vertical sweep, a four-wing middle frame with PZT actuators that drives the inner frame for the horizontal sweep, and an inner frame that decouples the mirror from the flexures — enables a compact 2D PZT resonant scanner to be fabricated with a three-mask process. The paper reports measured optical scan angles of 4.8° (vertical) and 11.5° (horizontal) at resonances of 3.6 kHz and 54.175 kHz, driven with 12 Vp-p periodic pulses. Quality factors of 750 (vertical) and 1050 (horizontal) are extracted from the optical frequency sweep, giving bandwidth-efficiency products of 24.2 and 623 deg·mm·kHz that the authors state are among the higher values reported for 2D PZT-MEMS scanners. Finite-element modal analysis places the vertical mode at 3.718 kHz and the horizontal mode at 54.504 kHz, in close agreement with measurement, with stresses well below the fracture strength of single-crystal silicon.

Load-bearing premise

The headline performance numbers assume that the quality factors measured in the optical setup (750 and 1050) are the device's true values, and that the roughly two-to-three-times-lower values from the separate laser measurement (about 301 and 643) are only artifacts of the tape mount and the weak 2 V drive used there, a dismissal the paper does not back with quantitative evidence.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Reducing the process from six masks to three lowers fabrication cost and alignment risk, which matters for moving resonant scanners from lab demonstrations toward production.
  • A 12 V peak-to-peak drive voltage is compatible with compact display and handheld imaging electronics, since no high-voltage driver stage is needed.
  • The horizontal bandwidth-efficiency product of 623 deg·mm·kHz places the device in the range the paper's cited reviews associate with high-resolution laser projection and imaging scanners.
  • The close agreement between simulated resonances (3.718 kHz and 54.504 kHz) and measured ones (3.6 kHz and 54.175 kHz) indicates the mechanical model is predictive enough to guide scaling of the design.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the lower vibrometer quality factors (about 301 and 643) are closer to the intrinsic device values than the optical ones, the actual bandwidth-efficiency products would be roughly two to three times smaller, and the claim of ranking among the higher 2D PZT scanners would need re-benchmarking.
  • The scan-angle saturation near 12 Vp-p suggests the reported angles are near the practical ceiling for this actuator geometry, so the authors' listed future changes (thicker device layer, modified folded beams) are the more plausible route to larger angles than raising drive voltage.
  • Because the paper cites competing piezoelectric materials such as AlScN and KNN, the same three-frame geometry could serve as a test bed: building the identical structure with a different piezoelectric film would separate the material's contribution from the architecture's contribution to scan angle and quality factor.
  • The decoupling inner frame and stiffening rim, validated by finite-element analysis for low mirror deformation, are the design features most transferable to other resonant scanner platforms, since they solve the general problem of keeping a mirror flat while allowing large angular motion.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reports a 2D PZT MEMS resonant scanner fabricated with a three-mask SOI process. The device uses an outer frame driven by four PZT cantilevers for vertical scanning at 3.6 kHz and a wing-shaped middle frame for horizontal scanning at 54.2 kHz. The authors present FEA modal analysis, fabrication details, and optical and Polytec MSA-600 characterization. They claim optical scan angles of 4.8° and 11.5°, Q factors of 750 and 1050, and bandwidth-efficiency products of 24.2 and 623 deg·mm·kHz at 12 Vp-p, and position these as among the higher values for 2D PZT MEMS scanners.

Significance. If the performance claims hold, the work would be a useful proof-of-concept: the three-mask process is a genuine simplification, the fabricated device is real and measured, and the simulated resonance frequencies agree closely with measurements (3.718 vs 3.6 kHz; 54.504 vs 54.175 kHz). The main value is the compact dual-axis architecture with a single die, which is relevant for OCT, LiDAR, and display applications. However, the headline Q factors and the resulting comparison to prior scanners are not yet established, because the paper reports two inconsistent Q measurements and explains the discrepancy only qualitatively.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 5, Figs. 7 and 8] The paper reports Q values of 750 (vertical) and 1050 (horizontal) from the optical setup (Fig. 8b) and 300.56 and 642.76 from the Polytec MSA-600 setup (Figs. 7c-d). The discrepancy is attributed to the tape/piezo-disk mounting and the 2 V excitation, but no quantitative model, control experiment, or ring-down measurement is provided. Because the optical Q is extracted at 12 Vp-p in a regime the paper itself associates with scan-angle saturation and piezoelectric nonlinearity, the higher values could be an artifact of a nonlinear frequency response rather than the intrinsic device Q. Since these Q values are used in the Abstract, Section 4, and Section 6 to claim high performance, this point must be resolved.
  2. [Section 4, Fig. 8a] The optical scan angles (4.8° and 11.5°) are reported without measurement uncertainty, number of repeated measurements, or a statement of how many devices were tested. The conversion from projected beam width to angle is described only qualitatively. Because the bandwidth-efficiency product in Section 5 and the comparison to prior scanners in Section 6 are computed from these single values, the precision and reproducibility of the quoted angles should be documented.
  3. [Section 6] The conclusion that the bandwidth-efficiency product "places it among the higher 2D piezoelectric MEMS scanners reported" is not supported by a quantified comparison. The paper cites prior scanners in the Introduction but does not tabulate their θ_opt, D, f, or θ·D·f values. Please add a comparison table or otherwise provide the quantitative basis for this ranking.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 2A] The die dimensions are given inconsistently: the Abstract says a 7 × 4.7 mm frame, Section 2A says a 1 cm × 1 cm die and movable components occupying 8 mm × 8 mm, and later the outer frame is 4 mm × 7.5 mm. Please reconcile these numbers.
  2. [Section 5] Section 5 refers to "as shown in Figure 6" when discussing the Polytec results; the correct reference appears to be Figure 7.
  3. [Section 4, Fig. 8b] The text and Fig. 8b caption describe the Q extraction as "calculated" without specifying the fitting procedure; please state the Lorentzian fit range and the number of frequency points used.
  4. [Section 2A] The middle frame is said to be connected to the outer frame via primary suspension flexures "each measuring 220 µm in length and 520 µm in width," which seems like an unusual aspect ratio; please clarify which dimension is length and which is width.
  5. [Section 3] The FEA section reports modal frequencies but no simulated Q or harmonic response amplitudes; since the experimental Q is a key claim, a brief FEA-based damping estimate would strengthen the comparison.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular dependency: all performance metrics are measured from the fabricated device; FEA is a forward simulation, and the cited prior work is process provenance rather than load-bearing evidence.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is empirical rather than self-referential. The headline claims—resonance frequencies (3.6 kHz vertical, 54.175 kHz horizontal), optical scan angles (4.8° and 11.5°), and quality factors (750 and 1050)—are obtained from direct optical measurements of the fabricated scanner (Figures 6 and 8), not from a fitted model or from a quantity defined in terms of the claim. The bandwidth-efficiency product θ_opt·D·f is computed arithmetically from these measured values, so it is a reported metric, not a prediction forced by construction. The finite element analysis (Section 3) is a forward modal and frequency-domain simulation using COMSOL's built-in material properties; no parameter is tuned to reproduce the measured results, and the simulation is compared with experiment rather than used to generate the experimental claims. The references to the authors' prior work [41,42] describe the derivation of the three-mask process and the PZT actuator elements; this is fabrication provenance, not an argument that reduces a scientific claim to a self-citation. The discrepancy between the optical Q values and the Polytec-measured Q values is a measurement-interpretation concern, not a circularity: the optical Q is not defined as the Polytec Q, and the paper explains the difference through mounting and drive-level effects. No uniqueness theorem, ansatz-smuggling citation, or renaming of a known result as a new prediction is present. The central results are externally measurable device characteristics, and the paper is self-contained against benchmarks in the sense that the performance numbers stand on their own measurements. Therefore no circular step meets the evidentiary standard required to flag it.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper is an experimental device report; the central performance numbers are measured rather than derived from fitted models. The main ledger items are unvalidated modeling and measurement assumptions: COMSOL material data, attribution of frequency shifts to over-etch, and the choice of optical-setup Q values over Polytec values.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption COMSOL built-in material properties (silicon, PZT, oxide) and the swept mesh accurately represent the fabricated device.
    Section 3 states material properties were defined using COMSOL's built-in library and that mesh was extremely fine, but no measured material constants for the deposited Ba-doped PZT are given.
  • domain assumption Measured resonance frequency deviations, roughly 3% lower than simulation, are explained by DRIE over-etch and material property differences.
    Section 4 attributes the 14 um over-etch to lower stiffness or mass, but no quantitative model or separate measurement confirms the mechanism.
  • domain assumption The optical-setup quality factors at 12 Vp-p are intrinsic device Q values, with the lower piezo-disk values caused by adhesive damping and low excitation.
    Section 5 argues the discrepancy without a quantitative transfer-function analysis; this assumption directly supports the abstract's Q=750/1050 claim.
  • domain assumption The mirror surface remains diffraction-limited during scanning based on FEA deformation profiles.
    Section 3 concludes deformation is negligible without reporting peak-to-valley deformation or wavefront error.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of 2D PZT MEMS Resonant Scanner Using a Three-Mask Process." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/B7Q444VL

@misc{pith2026250524566,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: 2D PZT MEMS Resonant Scanner Using a Three-Mask Process},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/B7Q444VL}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.24566}
}
abstract

This work presents the design, simulation, fabrication, and characterization of a novel architectural compact two-dimensional (2D) resonant MEMS scanning mirror actuated by thin-film lead zirconate titanate (PZT). The device employs an innovative mechanically coupled dual-axis architecture fabricated using a three-mask process on an SOI-PZT deposited wafer, significantly reducing system complexity while achieving high performance. The scanner integrates a 1 $\times$ 1.4 mm oval mirror within a 7 $\times$ 4.7 mm die, actuated by PZT thin-film elements optimized for resonant operation at 3.6 kHz (vertical) and 54.2 kHz (horizontal) under 12 V$_{\mathrm{p-p}}$ periodic pulse driving. The system achieves optical scan angles of 4.8$^\circ$ and 11.5$^\circ$ in vertical and horizontal directions, respectively, with quality factors of 750 (vertical) and 1050 (horizontal). These values contribute to high scanning bandwidth-efficiency products of 24.2 deg$\cdot$mm$\cdot$kHz (vertical) and 623 deg$\cdot$mm$\cdot$kHz (horizontal), among the higher values reported for 2D PZT-MEMS scanners. Finite element analysis confirmed minimal stress and mirror deformation, and experimental validation demonstrated excellent agreement with simulation results. This architecture demonstrates the feasibility of high-resolution laser scanning, as required in applications such as OCT, LiDAR, and displays, by achieving performance levels in line with those used in such systems.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.24566 by the authors.

Figure 3
Figure 3. Fabrication process flowchart. (a) Initial wafer. (b) (Mask [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. (a) Modal analysis of the first mode at 3.718 kHz, showing the outer frame resonating on its torsional beams, which [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_5.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

54 extracted references · 54 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Journal of Microelectromechanical Systems, 2024

    Fang, X.-Y., et al., A 2D MEMS Crosstalk-Free Electromagnetic Micromirror for LiDAR Application. Journal of Microelectromechanical Systems, 2024

    work page 2024

  2. [2]

    Zolfaghari, and H

    Khodapanahandeh, M., P. Zolfaghari, and H. Urey. Non-Resonant and Resonant 2D Quasi-Static PZT MEMS Scanners for LiDAR Applications. in 2024 International Conference on Optical MEMS and Nanophotonics (OMN). 2024. IEEE

    work page 2024

  3. [3]

    Photonics Research, 2024

    Li, Z., et al., Towards an ultrafast 3D imaging scanning LiDAR system: a review. Photonics Research, 2024. 12(8): p. 1709-1729

    work page 2024

  4. [4]

    Watkins, and H

    Wang, D., C. Watkins, and H. Xie, MEMS mirrors for LiDAR: A review. Micromachines,

    work page

  5. [5]

    IEEE Sensors Journal, 2021

    Wang, D., et al., A miniature LiDAR with a detached MEMS scanner for micro-robotics. IEEE Sensors Journal, 2021. 21(19): p. 21941-21946

    work page 2021

  6. [6]

    Optics & Laser Technology, 2024

    Zolfaghari, P., et al., Cascaded laser scanning towards high-resolution LiDAR. Optics & Laser Technology, 2024. 168: p. 109906

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    Optics and Lasers in Engineering, 2022

    Li, Q., et al., MEMS mirror based omnidirectional scanning for LiDAR optical systems. Optics and Lasers in Engineering, 2022. 158: p. 107178

    work page 2022

  8. [8]

    Micromachines, 2022

    Liu, Y., et al., AlScN piezoelectric MEMS mirrors with large field of view for LiDAR application. Micromachines, 2022. 13(9): p. 1550

    work page 2022

Show all 54 references
  1. [9]

    Development of Piezoelectrically Driven Quasi-Static 2D MEMS Mirrors with Extremely Large FoV for Scanning LiDARs

    Raschdorf, P., et al. Development of Piezoelectrically Driven Quasi-Static 2D MEMS Mirrors with Extremely Large FoV for Scanning LiDARs. in Proceedings. 2024. MDPI

    2024

  2. [10]

    Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering,

    Yang, H.-M., et al., Design of bi-axial piezoelectric MEMS micro mirror with gimbal actuator for dynamic decoupling. Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering,

  3. [11]

    Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering, 2023

    Liu, S.-C., et al., On the Design of Piezoelectric actuator for 1D MEMS scanning mirror applications. Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering, 2023. 33(3): p. 034002

    2023

  4. [12]

    P‐44: A Smart Eye Tracking System Based on Linear Array Sensors

    Jin, X., et al. P‐44: A Smart Eye Tracking System Based on Linear Array Sensors. in SID Symposium Digest of Technical Papers. 2024. Wiley Online Library

    2024

  5. [13]

    3.8× 3.8 mm 2 Tiny Piezoelectric Resonant MEMS Scanner Using Fork-Shaped and Ring-Shaped Actuators

    Okamoto, Y., et al. 3.8× 3.8 mm 2 Tiny Piezoelectric Resonant MEMS Scanner Using Fork-Shaped and Ring-Shaped Actuators. in 2024 IEEE 37th International Conference on Micro Electro Mechanical Systems (MEMS). 2024. IEEE

    2024

  6. [14]

    International Journal of Imaging Systems and Technology, 2024

    Kim, H., et al., Development of handheld optical coherence tomography based on commercial intra‐oral scanner shape for extended clinical utility in dentistry. International Journal of Imaging Systems and Technology, 2024. 34(1): p. e23024

    2024

  7. [15]

    IEEE Sensors Journal, 2024

    Struk, P., et al., Optical coherence tomography imaging by a fully integrated MOEMS endomicroscopy probe with Mirau micro-interferometer and two-axis electrothermal micro-scanner using Lissajous trajectory scanning. IEEE Sensors Journal, 2024

    2024

  8. [16]

    Microsystems & Nanoengineering, 2024

    Wang, W.-C., et al., Mirrorless MEMS imaging: a nonlinear vibrational approach utilizing aerosol-jetted PZT-actuated fiber MEMS scanner for microscale illumination. Microsystems & Nanoengineering, 2024. 10(1): p. 13

    2024

  9. [17]

    International Journal of Optomechatronics, 2024

    Antonello, R., et al., Control of a quasi-static MEMS Mirror for raster scanning projection applications. International Journal of Optomechatronics, 2024. 18(1): p. 2386991

    2024

  10. [18]

    Kasturi, and V

    Milanovic, V., A. Kasturi, and V. Hachtel. High brightness MEMS mirror based head-up display (HUD) modules with wireless data streaming capability. in MOEMS and Miniaturized Systems XIV. 2015. SPIE

    2015

  11. [19]

    Yamaguchi, and T

    Nakagawa, J., H. Yamaguchi, and T. Yasuda. Head up display with laser scanning unit. in ODS 2019: Industrial Optical Devices and Systems. 2019. SPIE

    2019

  12. [20]

    Laser beam scanning based AR-display applying resonant 2D MEMS mirrors

    Petrak, O., et al. Laser beam scanning based AR-display applying resonant 2D MEMS mirrors. in Optical Architectures for Displays and Sensing in Augmented, Virtual, and Mixed Reality (AR, VR, MR) II. 2021. SPIE

    2021

  13. [21]

    Procedia Engineering, 2010

    Raboud, D., et al., MEMS based color-VGA micro-projector system. Procedia Engineering, 2010. 5: p. 260-263

    2010

  14. [22]

    Baran, and H

    Holmström, S.T., U. Baran, and H. Urey, MEMS laser scanners: a review. Journal of Microelectromechanical Systems, 2014. 23(2): p. 259-275

    2014

  15. [23]

    Pribošek, and M

    Piot, A., J. Pribošek, and M. Moridi. Dual-axis resonant scanning mems mirror with pulsed-laser-deposited barium-doped PZT. in 2021 IEEE 34th International Conference on Micro Electro Mechanical Systems (MEMS). 2021. IEEE

    2021

  16. [24]

    Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering, 2020

    Ghazali, F.A.M., et al., MEMS actuators for biomedical applications: a review. Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering, 2020. 30(7): p. 073001

    2020

  17. [25]

    Modeling electrostatic MEMS actuator

    Kolka, Z., et al. Modeling electrostatic MEMS actuator. in 2021 28th IEEE International Conference on Electronics, Circuits, and Systems (ICECS). 2021. IEEE

    2021

  18. [26]

    Optics and Lasers in Engineering, 2013

    Liu, Y., et al., Large size MEMS scanning mirror with vertical comb drive for tunable optical filter. Optics and Lasers in Engineering, 2013. 51(1): p. 54-60

    2013

  19. [27]

    Manvi, M. and K.M. Swamy, Microelectronic materials, microfabrication processes, micromechanical structural configuration based stiffness evaluation in MEMS: A review. Microelectronic Engineering, 2022. 263: p. 111854

    2022

  20. [28]

    Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering, 2018

    Alneamy, A., et al., Dual actuation micro-mirrors. Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering, 2018. 28(7): p. 075014

    2018

  21. [29]

    Fan, C. and S. He, A microelectrostatic repulsive-torque rotation actuator with two-width fingers. Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering, 2015. 25(9): p. 095006

    2015

  22. [30]

    and S.-S

    Pillai, G. and S.-S. Li, Piezoelectric MEMS resonators: A review. IEEE Sensors Journal,

  23. [31]

    Mirzajani, and M

    Zolfaghari, P., H. Mirzajani, and M. Zadehsafari, Piezoelectric MEMS disk-shaped and ring-shaped resonators utilizing Lamb wave. Micro and Nanosystems, 2018. 10(2): p. 110-124. 23

    2018

  24. [32]

    An acoustic piezoelectric ring-shape Lamb wave MEMS resonator

    Zolfaghari, P., et al. An acoustic piezoelectric ring-shape Lamb wave MEMS resonator. in 2017 4th International Conference on Electrical and Electronic Engineering (ICEEE)

    2017

  25. [33]

    Sensors and Actuators A: Physical, 2025

    Lin, H.-Y., et al., On the design of a KNN piezoelectric MEMS resonant scanner for wide- angle and high-frequency scanning. Sensors and Actuators A: Physical, 2025. 390: p. 116586

    2025

  26. [34]

    Lu, and K

    Wang, X., F. Lu, and K. Qiao, Closed-loop control for deflection of cantilever beam based on hybrid photovoltaic/piezoelectric actuation mechanism. International Journal of Applied Electromagnetics and Mechanics, 2017. 53(3): p. 497-509

    2017

  27. [35]

    Wang, and P

    Chen, C.-D., Y.-J. Wang, and P. Chang, A novel two-axis MEMS scanning mirror with a PZT actuator for laser scanning projection. Optics express, 2012. 20(24): p. 27003- 27017

    2012

  28. [36]

    2D micro scanner actuated by sol-gel derived double layered PZT

    Tsaur, J., et al. 2D micro scanner actuated by sol-gel derived double layered PZT. in Technical Digest. MEMS 2002 IEEE International Conference. Fifteenth IEEE International Conference on Micro Electro Mechanical Systems (Cat. No. 02CH37266)

    2002

  29. [37]

    Integrated Ferroelectrics, 2006

    Yasuda, Y., et al., Piezoelectric 2D-optical micro scanners with PZT thick films. Integrated Ferroelectrics, 2006. 80(1): p. 341-353

    2006

  30. [38]

    Design, fabrication and characterization of low-voltage piezoelectric two-axis gimbal-less microscanners

    Gu-Stoppel, S., et al. Design, fabrication and characterization of low-voltage piezoelectric two-axis gimbal-less microscanners. in 2013 Transducers & Eurosensors XXVII: The 17th International Conference on Solid-State Sensors, Actuators and Microsystems (TRANSDUCERS & EUROSEN...

    2013

  31. [39]

    A two-axis piezoelectric tilting micromirror with a newly developed PZT- meandering actuator

    Tani, M., et al. A two-axis piezoelectric tilting micromirror with a newly developed PZT- meandering actuator. in 2007 IEEE 20th International Conference on Micro Electro Mechanical Systems (MEMS). 2007. IEEE

    2007

  32. [40]

    A combination of fast resonant mode and slow static deflection of SOI- PZT actuators for MEMS image projection display

    Tani, M., et al. A combination of fast resonant mode and slow static deflection of SOI- PZT actuators for MEMS image projection display. in IEEE/LEOS International Conference on Optical MEMS and Their Applications Conference, 2006. 2006. IEEE

    2006

  33. [41]

    Journal of microelectromechanical systems, 2012

    Baran, U., et al., Resonant PZT MEMS scanner for high-resolution displays. Journal of microelectromechanical systems, 2012. 21(6): p. 1303-1310

    2012

  34. [42]

    Resonant PZT MEMS scanners with integrated angle sensors

    Baran, U., et al. Resonant PZT MEMS scanners with integrated angle sensors. in 2014 International Conference on Optical MEMS and Nanophotonics. 2014. IEEE

    2014

  35. [43]

    Journal of Materials Research, 2011

    Gaither, M.S., et al., Deformation and fracture of single-crystal silicon theta-like specimens. Journal of Materials Research, 2011. 26(20): p. 2575-2589

    2011

  36. [44]

    Analysis of the nonlinear response of piezo-micromirrors with the harmonic balance method

    Opreni, A., et al. Analysis of the nonlinear response of piezo-micromirrors with the harmonic balance method. in Actuators. 2021. MDPI

    2021

  37. [45]

    Optics Express, 2023

    Zhang, Y., et al., Resolution adjustable Lissajous scanning with piezoelectric MEMS mirrors. Optics Express, 2023. 31(2): p. 2846-2859

    2023

  38. [46]

    Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering, 2024

    Tang, K.-W., et al., Aspect ratio optimization of piezoelectric extensional mode resonators for quality factor and phase noise performance enhancement. Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering, 2024. 34(11): p. 115003

    2024

  39. [47]

    Lynes, D.D. and H. Chandrahalim, Influence of a tailored oxide interface on the quality factor of microelectromechanical resonators. Advanced Materials Interfaces, 2023. 10(9): p. 2202446

    2023

  40. [48]

    Resonant body transistors in standard CMOS technology

    Marathe, R., et al. Resonant body transistors in standard CMOS technology. in 2012 IEEE International Ultrasonics Symposium. 2012. IEEE

    2012

  41. [49]

    Wang, W. and D. Weinstein. Acoustic Bragg reflectors for Q-enhancement of unreleased MEMS resonators. in 2011 Joint Conference of the IEEE International Frequency Control and the European Frequency and Time Forum (FCS) Proceedings. 2011. IEEE

    2011

  42. [50]

    Gorecki, C. and S. Bargiel. MEMS scanning mirrors for optical coherence tomography. in Photonics. 2020. MDPI. 24

    2020

  43. [51]

    Applied Spectroscopy Reviews, 2025

    Liu, S., et al., Handheld optical coherence tomography for tissue imaging: current design and medical applications. Applied Spectroscopy Reviews, 2025. 60(3): p. 292-316

    2025

  44. [52]

    Wagner, and P.A

    Chopra, R., S.K. Wagner, and P.A. Keane, Optical coherence tomography in the 2020s—outside the eye clinic. Eye, 2021. 35(1): p. 236-243

    2021

  45. [2020]

    12589-12605

    21(11): p. 12589-12605

  46. [2024]

    34(10): p. 105009. 22

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.