Nano Impact:Working Towards Solutions

that Benefit SocietyMark Tuominen Professor of Physics

Why do we pursue nanoscienceand nanotechnology?

• To help solve major societal issues: energy,water, health, sustainability, knowledge andothers

• To make better products: smaller, cheaper,faster and more effective.

• To explore and gain greater scientificunderstanding

Global Grand Challenges

2008 NAE Grand Challenges

The Medici Effect at Work:Interdisciplinary Teamwork

in Nanotechnology

• Physics• Chemistry• Biology• Materials Science• Polymer Science• Electrical Engineering• Chemical Engineering• Mechanical Engineering• Medicine• And others

• Electronics• Materials• Health/Biotech• Chemical• Environmental• Energy• Food• Aerospace• Automotive• Security• Forest products

nano.gov

NSF Center for HierarchicalManufacturing

Research Education Outreach

A Center on Nanomanufacturing at UMass

Nanomanufacturing- the essential link betweenlaboratory innovations andnanotechnology products.

Currently: "Nano" in the ManufacturingValue Chain

Nano-manufacturedfeedstockmaterial

Value-addedprocesses ProductValue-added

processes

Nano-manufacturingvalue-addedprocess

Initialfeedstock &value-addedprocesses

ProductValue-addedprocesses

or

A Working Definition

Nanomanufacturing - the use ofprocesses that control matter atthe nanoscale for reproducible,commercial-scale production.

Factors Influencing the CommercialImplementation of Nanomanufacturing

Processes• Built on robust science and technology• Value of physical properties and impact on performance• Statistical distributions of properties• Knowledge of process-property relationships (for design and mfg)• Reproducibility and reliability• Useful standards (ISO & others)• Availability of suitable process and metrology tools• Compatibility of NM process with surround mfg processes• Trained workforce• Manufacturing cost and mode (in-house or outsource)• EHS throughout life cycle• Scalability and extensibility

Current NM technologies are at varied levels of maturity Many at infancy; data/information is sparse

NanoMFGProcessesMaterials

Metrology

Workforce

EHS

Information

Tools

Education

Standards Economic

Nanomanufacturing System

NanomanufacturingStakeholders

AcademicCenters

IndustryGovernment

Labs &Agencies

Four NSF NanomanufacturingResearch Centers

– Center for Hierarchical Manufacturing (CHM)- UMass Amherst/UPR/MHC/Binghamton

– Center for High-Rate Nanomanufacturing (CHN)- Northeastern/UMass Lowell/UNH

– Center for Scalable and Integrated Nanomanufacturing (SINAM)- UC Berkeley/UCLA/UCSD/Stanford/UNC Charlotte

– Center for Nanoscale Chemical-Electrical-Mechanical ManufacturingSystems (Nano-CEMMS)- UIUC/CalTech/NC A&T

Portfolio ofNanomanufacturing Technologies

(CHM, CHN, SINAM, Nano-CEMMS)Processes, expertise and facilities for:• Materials and patterning via self-assembly• Micro/nanofluidic fabrication• Advanced nanoscale lithographies• High-rate, high-volume bottom-up assembly• Synthesis for bionanotechnology• Nano deposition and etching process• Nanoscale integration• Systems engineering and scale-up• Machine tool approaches• Safety

An open access network for the advancementof nanomanufacturing R&D and education

– Cooperative activities (real-space)– Informatics (cyber-space)

Mission: A catalyst -- to support and develop communitiesof practice in nanomanufacturing.

www.nanomanufacturing.org

nanomanufacturing.org

Nanoinformatics

• Nanotechnology meets Information Technology

• The development of effective mechanisms for collecting,sharing, visualizing, modeling and analyzing data andinformation relevant to the nanoscale science andengineering community.

• The utilization of information and communicationtechnologies that help to launch and support efficientcommunities of practice.

Nano-informatics: Some MajorNanotech Research Communities

Nanomanufacturing

Environmental,Health & Safety

FundamentalResearch

SocietalImpact

Modeling & Simulation

NationalInfrastructure

Health & Life Sciences

Metrology

Commercialization

Education

Energy

Materials

2009 Nanomanufacturing SummitMay 27-29, 2009

Boston Massachusetts

Mike RocoNational Science Foundation

Estimation of Annual Implications of Federal Investment in Nanotechnology R&D (2008)

* The corresponding R&D in 2008 is about 10 times larger than in 1998

** Est. taxes 20%

$1.5B* federal R&D: NNI

~$1.9B industry R&D

$B industry operating cost

~$70B** Final Products

~140,000

Jobs***

~$14B Taxes

~$1.9B ind. R&D

*** Est. $500,000/yr/job

(M. Roco, 2009) M.C. Roco, 5/27/2009

WORLDWIDE MARKET INCORPORATING NANOTECNOLOGY (2000-2015)

(Estimation made in 2000

after international study in > 20 countries; data standing in 2008)

1

10

100

1000

10000

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

YEAR

MARKET

INCORPORATI

NG

NANOTE

CHNOLO

GY ($

B)

Total $B

Deutche BankLux Research

Mith. Res. Inst.

Passive nanostructuresActive nanostructures

Systems of NS

Annual rate of increase about 25%

Rudimentary Complex

$1T products by 2015

Reference: MC Roco and WS Bainbridge, Springer, 2001

~ $120B products NT in the main stream~ $40B

products

Final products incorporating

nano (2000)

MC Roco, 5/27/2009

Generations of Products and Productive Processes Timeline for beginning of industrial prototyping and

nanotechnology commercialization

(2000-2020)

11stst::

Passive nanostructures

(1st

generation products)

Ex: coatings, nanoparticles, nanostructured metals, polymers, ceramics

22ndnd: Active nanostructures

Ex: 3D transistors, amplifiers, targeted drugs, actuators, adaptive structures

33rdrd: Systems of nanosystems Ex: guided assembling; 3D networking and new

hierarchical architectures, robotics, evolutionary

44thth:

Molecular

nanosystems Ex: molecular devices ‘by design’, atomic design, emerging functions

~

2010

~

2005

~ 20002000

Incr

ease

d C

ompl

exity

, Dy

nam

ics, T

rans

disc

iplin

arity

~ 20152015-- 20202020

CMU

Converging technologies Ex: nano-bio-info from nanoscale, cognitive technologies; large complex systems from nanoscale

Reference: AIChE Journal, Vol. 50 (5), 2004

Dan HerrSemiconductor Research

Corporation

23Source: Kurzweil 1999 – Moravec 1998

1900 1920 1940 1960

IE-5

IE-3

IE+0

IE+3

IE+6

IE+9

IE+12

Co

mp

uta

tio

ns p

er

se

co

nd

IntegratedCircuit

DiscreteTransistor

VacuumTube

Electro-Mechanical

Mechanical

202020001980

Nanotechnology

NRI Goal: Continue the Curve . . .

$1000 Buys:

4

Scaling Drives the Industry

Smaller features Better performance & cost/function

More apps Larger market

Neil RobertsonHitachi Global Storage

Technologies

10May 09© 2008 Hitachi Global Storage Technologies

Master Pattern Lithography Roadmap

E-beam lithography e-beam prepattern + block copolymer self-assembly

400 1600140012001000800600 20001800

rotary stage e-beam

e-beam + density multiplier

Pattern density (Gbit/sq. inch)

1 Tbit/in2 pattern clean-up

1X density

4X density

Write at twice the period…

…and self-assembly fills in the missing dots

720 Gbit/in2 (30 nm period):Holes etched in Si master mold

(Leica VB-6 100 kV w/ PMMA, cold ultrasonic develop; RIE pattern transfer)

13May 09© 2008 Hitachi Global Storage Technologies

Pattern Density Multiplication (4:1 Guiding)

E-beam pre-pattern Block Copolymer Dot Size Distribution

σs=35nm2

σp=22nm2

σs=39nm2

σp=13nm2

78 nm period 39 nm period

54 nm period 27 nm period

R. Ruiz, H. Kang, F. A. Detcheverry, E. Dobisz, D. S. Kercher, T. R. Albrecht, J. J. de Pablo, P. F. Nealey, Science 2008, 321, 936.

8May 09© 2008 Hitachi Global Storage Technologies

Bit Patterned Media: A Potential Fabrication Overview

Template Fabrication Media Fabrication Process

Deposition of magnetic layers

Nanoimprint

Pattern Transfer(i.e. Etching)

Planarization

Lube and Burnish

Inspection

Rotary Stage E-BeamPatterning

DirectedSelf-Assembly

Incoming disk substrateExisting Processes

New Processes

TemplateReplication

Master TemplateFabrication

10,000 replicated nanoimprint templates1 master (e-beam +

self-assembly)100,000,000 patterned disks

Anil PatriNational Institutes of Health

2

Human Burden of Cancer

1,444,920 Americans were diagnosed

with cancer in 2007

559,650 Americans died of cancer

in 2007

$206.3 billion was spent on healthcare

cost for cancer in 2006

21.9

180.7

48.1

586.8

193.9

53.3

190.1231.5

100

200

300

400

500

600

Heart

Diseases

Cerebrovascular

Diseases

Pneumonia/

InfluenzaCancer

1950

2003

De

ath

Ra

te P

er

10

0,0

00

Unlike Other Major Disease Killers, Cancer

Continues to Take the Nearly Same Toll

As In 1950

Source for 2005 deaths and diagnoses: American Cancer Society (ACS) 2005 Cancer Facts &

Figures; Atlanta, Georgia; Source for 2003 age-adjusted death rate: National Center for Health

Statistics, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, CHS Public-use file for 2003 deaths.

Need Better Therapies !

Human Burden of Cancer

1,444,920 Americans were diagnosed

with cancer in 2007

559,650 Americans died of cancer

in 2007

$206.3 billion was spent on healthcare

cost for cancer in 2006

Human Burden of Cancer

44

Going Small for Big Advances

Cancer Nanotechnology

• Screening• Increased sensitivity

• Early Detection of Cancer

• Solubility• Carrier for therapeutics

• Improved PK and PD of Drug

• Multifunctional capability• Imaging and targeted drug delivery

• Active and passive targeting• Ligands, EPR

• Reduced systemic toxicity

Solubility Stability Specificity = Toxicity Efficacy

Sharon SmithLockheed Martin

Aeronautics

3

Chris HartshornLux Research

8

Nanomaterials

Nanotechnology value chain for power tools

Nanointermediates Nano‐enabled products

10

0%2%4%6%8%

10%12%14%16%

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Profit margin

Nanomaterials Nanointermediates Nano-enabled products

Target nanointermediates for the most profit

29

Nanointermediates still pay off…

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Profit margin

Manufacturing and materials Electronics and IT

Healthcare and life sciences Energy and environment

Ed CupoliUniversity of Albany

cnse.albany.edu

The Traditional Role of Academia

6/1/2009

3

Source: National Science Foundation, Division of Science Resources Statistics, Science and Engineering Indicators 2008.

Academic Research Composition

In 2006 U.S. academic

institutions spent $48 billion

on R&D.

• Academia accounts for:

• 57% of all basic research

• 12% of all applied research

• 1% of all development

• Typically academic institutions

commercialize their research via

Technology Transfer Offices or

Entrepreneurship.

• Industry has a limited role in most

academic models: 5.7% of academic

research is funded by industries.

~75%

Basic

~4%

Development

~21%

Applied

cnse.albany.edu

Education

Economic Development

Workforce Development

6/1/2009

8

The university of the future is a critical element in the

development of educational, technological and workforce

infrastructures

• Provide top quality education

• Develop the workforce

needed for the 21st century

• Become a catalyst for

economic growth