top of page

MEMS Accelerometers vs. Geophones

MEMS Technology Proven More Reliable at Low- & High-Frequency Vibration Monitoring

Independent, third-party lab vibration monitoring testing compared the MEMS-based accelerometer used by the Inzwa Veva III vibration sensor to a solenoid geophone-based vibration sensor against the ISEE standard. The geophone-based device performed as the manufacturer advertised and as any field practitioner would expect, and was consistent with the manufacturer's calibration report. Both sensing technologies performed within specifications in the middle part of the range. What’s glaring, however, is the superior performance of the MEMS technology at both the lower and upper ranges of the scale:

  • Lower Range: at 1.5Hz, the geophone-based sensor had approximately 2dB lower response than the MEMS sensor. At 1Hz, that performance gap grew to approximately 8dB – 60% lower than the MEMS sensor.

  • Upper Range: At frequency levels above 125 Hz, performance differences as high as 24% were recorded between the different technologies, with the MEMS sensor providing more accurate readings. Also note that beyond the ISEE’s upper limit of 250Hz, the MEMS technology continued to perform better than the geophone-based sensor.

MEMS Accelerometers vs Geophones Graph
MEMS Accelerometers vs. Geophones Test Graph
MEMS Accelerometers vs Geophones Test Graph

The Data are Clear:

MEMS-based accelerometers not only perform well within the ISEE standard – they also provide SUPERIOR performance for vibration monitoring at frequencies below 2Hz and above 125Hz.

To download a copy of these findings, please click the link below.

MEMS vs Geophones for Vibration Monitoring Research Paper

Want to learn more?

Request a free trial today.

bottom of page