Foresight Nanotech Institute Logo
Image of nano

“Nanobridges” and “nanocolonnades” for mass production

Roland Piquepaille writes "Even if researchers are routinely building all kinds of nanodevices in their labs, the current production process of nanowires or nanosensors is similar to the car manufacturing process before Henry Ford. These nanostructures are almost handmade. Now, researchers at University of California Davis (UC Davis) have adapted a technology developed for Hewlett-Packard Laboratories. And they came with two new ways to massively produce nanowires of precise length. Their 'nanobridges' and 'nanocolonnades' are totally compatible with existing microelectronics fabrication processes. This opens the way for to a wide range of industrial-strength applications, such as bio-chemical sensing, nanoelectronics, nanophotonics, memory and logic devices for future computing. [See also] other details and references." Ed. Note — Roland later added:
Their 'nanobridges' and 'nanocolonnades' are totally compatible with existing microelectronics fabrication processes. Please note that if these new processes are fully compatible with the ones used to day by chipmakers, which are using at best 65 nm processes, this means that there is a little bit of hype in the UC Davis news report. Anyway, this might open the way for to a wide range of industrial-strength applications, such as bio-chemical sensing, nanoelectronics, nanophotonics, memory and logic devices for future computing.

2 Responses to ““Nanobridges” and “nanocolonnades” for mass production”

  1. RobertBradbury Says:

    Not quite nano-…

    It is worth noting that the "nanobridges" cited here do not meet the NSF "nano-" definition because the diameter of the bridges is 180nm. Other pictures of "nano"-bridges (here) do not meet the sub-100nm definition as well. (Note: as the picture is credited to Princeton, it is likely to be different work from that of the HP/Islam group.)

    One should be careful before assuming that everything claimed to be "nano-" really indeed is so. Since almost all chemical molecules (with the exception of large polymers) can probably be considered "nano-" it can be argued that every chemist in the world is a "nanotechnologist". There are doubts that should be raised when the results are too big, too small or too simple.

  2. Chemisor Says:

    Re:Not quite nano-…

    I'm not sure I'd tag any such structures with "nano". In a perfect world the term would only apply to MNT, meaning that you'd need some machinery to qualify, machinery that does something. In other words, a pile of nanotubes is not nanotechnology, no matter how artfully arranged. A transistor made from nanotubes is, and so is a rod logic assembly.

Leave a Reply