Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Fluid Logic Chips

Posted by timothy on from the if-rains-pours dept.

Doc Ruby writes "Colorado researchers 'have constructed microfluidic gates that use the relative flow resistance of liquid to carry out the basic logic operations NOT, AND, OR, XOR, NOR and NAND. The researchers have also combined a pair of gates into a half adder, which carries out half the operation of addition.' All CPUs processing binary logic are made of these types of gates, but usually execute as flows of electrons in wires, not fluids in tubes. Will this advance revolutionize chemistry and computing the way electric gates revolutionized electronics and computing? Will 'fluid programmers' give new meaning to "flowchart"?"

11 of 250 comments (clear)

  1. How fast? by cbrocious · · Score: 3, Interesting

    How fast could this ever be? Neat, but I dunno how this could ever be put to a practical use. Cool hack none the less.

    --
    Disconnect and self-destruct, one bullet at a time.
    1. Re:How fast? by polecat_redux · · Score: 3, Interesting

      that is still a lot faster then we can move an object bigger then an atom.

      True, but you wouldn't necessarily need to move a specific liquid molecule through an entire path/circuit. For example, say you have a tube filled with water, and you were to apply pressure on one end, almost instantly, water would be expelled from the other end. The "distance" that any single molecule of water along the path would need to travel depends only on how much water you want to get out of the other end.

      For lack of a better analogy, it would be like poking someone with a stick rather than throwing a rock at them - travel time is mostly eliminated.

    2. Re:How fast? by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It *is* silicon - it just routes tiny, single-file fluid molecules through empty channels, rather than really tiny clouds of electrons through conductive channels.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    3. Re:How fast? by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The drift velocity for DC current is around a few mm/sec, but the individual root-mean-square electron velocities in a wire are comparable to c. (Regardless of current.) Although they keep scattering off the copper atoms and off each other and change direction all the time, so they don't travel very far. But the signal propagation velocity through a wire depends much more on the rms velocity than the aggregate current drift velocity.

      People are generally surprised that drift velocity of electrical current is so slow. When I was in middle school there were two water fountains in the cafeteria, separated by a hundred feet or so. A common trick was to wait until someone was drinking at one fountain, then turn the handle on the other fountain really fast- on/off/on/off/on/off- and they would instantly get sprayed in the face. Even though the bulk of the water itself drifted slowly through the pipes as you drank it, the individual water molecules were bouncing around in all directions at high speeds and the signal conduction through the water between the fountains was very fast.

    4. Re:How fast? by ddimas · · Score: 2, Interesting
      This also implies that fluidic computing will always be slower than electronics, because the fundmental speed is orders of magnitudes slower. Which doesn't mean it is useless, I'm just killing two birds with one stone here, showing why this is no threat to electronics :-)


      This looks to be more useful for a fast and accurate "tricorder" device. Looking at it from a chemical point of view you can "preprogram" a whole lot of tests onto this thing and just fly. I for one (having done more than my share of chemical analysis) would love to see this device in a lab. I would save literally years of set up time.

  2. chemistry and computing? by k98sven · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Will this advance revolutionize chemistry and computing the way electric gates revolutionized electronics and computing?

    I'm not sure if this is a typo.. but I see no real use for this in computing.. unless you want computers which (at best) work like conventional ones except much, much, much, slower.

    However, in chemistry.. it may very well become a big thing. One possible use I can think of is for building automated little microlaboratories, controlling the mixage and flow of different chemicals.

    This, in general, is a hot research topic in chemistry.. Already in biotech a lot of things similar to this are being put to practical use (Chip assays is an example).

    Basically, it's the revolution of miniaturization which is (finally..) coming to chemistry.

  3. Teaching tool? by supz · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Couldn't this be used as a great tool for teaching? You should show people exactly what is happening inside a processor. It's always so difficult to get people to picture something they cannot see, and this would make a great visual example

    --

    SuPz.orG

  4. Re:It's not like this is new logic... by NanoGator · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "This is a new way to do binary logic mechanically, but until they get this to the speed of copper chips they're not going to be useful for much."

    Would they survive an EM burst?

    --
    "Derp de derp."
  5. Corning fluidics (from about 1972) by klubar · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Many years ago (about 1972), Corning and others made "fluidics" devices that used air to implement simple nand gates. They were looking for applications, such as explosive environments (fireworks factories, cotton processing) that relays wouldn't work well in. The devices had simple sensors and could implement logic by combining nand gates. There were a couple of competitors that made fluidic devices. The Corning were small black cans about 2" high and 1/2 around; the air supply was connected on the top and there were 4-inputs and one output on the bottom.

    Cute, but they went no where. I put together a neat high school science fair project with them and got to the county level.

    Nice to see the concept recycled.

  6. Re:It's not like this is new logic... by jfengel · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Yes, they would survive an EM burst.

    I used to work in a fluidics laboratory as an intern [hey, I actually know something for once that every Slashdotter doesn't know!] and one of the purposes they were developing this stuff for was because of its ability to survive an EM burst. They were talking about using it in fighter planes for exactly that reason.

    This was two decades ago, I'm ashamed to admit [I mean, I can't believe I've gotten so old that I remember two decades ago], and the things this lab built were way, way larger than the stuff being talked about in the article.

  7. NCR at the1963 World's Fair by Baldrson · · Score: 2, Interesting
    From the Boundary Institute's CV list:
    Thomas Etter's background is in mathematics and philosophy. He has worked in various ways with computers, holding several early patents on integrated circuits, one of which was demonstrated by National Cash Register Inc. at the 1963 World's Fair.
    Etter's integrated circuit demonstration was of a fluidic device.
    --
    Seastead this.