Slashdot Mirror


Liquid Metal Capsules Used To Make Self-Healing Electronics

MrSeb writes "A crack team of engineers at the University of Illinois has developed an electronic circuit that autonomously self-heals when its metal wires are broken. This self-healing system restores conductivity within 'mere microseconds,' which is apparently fast enough that operation can continue without interruption. The self-healing mechanism is delightfully simple: The engineers place a bunch of 10-micron (0.01mm) microcapsules along the length of a circuit. The microcapsules are full of liquid metal, a gallium-indium alloy, and if the circuit underneath cracks, so do the microcapsules (90% of the time, anyway — the tech isn't perfect yet!). The liquid metal oozes into the circuit board, restoring up to 99% conductivity, and everything continues as normal. This even works with multi-layer printed circuit boards (PCBs), such the motherboard in your computer, too. There's no word on whether this same technology could one day be used by Terminators to self-heal shotgun blasts to the face, but it certainly sounds quite similar. The immediate use-cases are in extreme environments (aerospace), and batteries (which can't be taken apart to fix), but long term we might one day buy motherboards with these self-healing microcapsules built in."

135 comments

  1. Crack Team? by sgt+scrub · · Score: 5, Funny

    I don't know if I'd want to be on a crack team. I'm more of a coke team kind of guy.

    --
    Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
    1. Re:Crack Team? by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 1

      This kind of story makes me sad. So much wasted potential - Think of how much more this team could have achieved if they had only stayed off drugs.

    2. Re:Crack Team? by mcgrew · · Score: 0

      Same drug, only difference is whether you want to ruin your lungs or your nasal passaages (or if you're hard core, your veins).

      No matter how you ingest it, cocaine is a NASTY drug that will ruin most users' lives. Mind you, I think it should be legal; you should have the right to screw your life up any way you want.

    3. Re:Crack Team? by elewton · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I don't know about *MOST* users lives. Most the people I know who use cocaine seem to do so infrequently, and as part of a balanced diet. That seems to be representative of coke users in general; problem users seem to represent 5%-15% of the population, similar to a lot of drugs, though the problematic effects are fairly severe, as is dependence.

      Crack cocaine is also a very different drug from base cocaine.

      I don't use either, and don't want to.

    4. Re:Crack Team? by mister_playboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Crack cocaine is also a very different drug from base cocaine.

      You must write minimum sentencing guidelines. :)

      --
      Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law ::: Love is the law, love under will
    5. Re:Crack Team? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Crack IS coke, essentially.

    6. Re:Crack Team? by mcgrew · · Score: 2

      Most people I know who use crack started out snorting cocaine occasionally, then daily, then went for the smoked version's extra rush. None of them are in the least productive, they're all ate up with ruined lives.

    7. Re:Crack Team? by f()rK()_Bomb · · Score: 1

      Almost all my friends came out of the other side of our drug years fine. Several are in college now, others have solid jobs. Out of the 30 or so friends I had that were hardcore (hardcore meaning taking speed, mdma, acid, coke on a daily basis. ) druggies only 2 of them ended up wasting their lives. Ancedotes prove nothing. We all knew crack was addictive, you can feel it the very next day pushing you. Just have to realise that. If your weak, or don't see how dangerous it is sure it will go horribly wrong. I'd bet those are the same people who would subcome to other addictions just as easily. I know I'm incredibly susceptible to addictive things, just need to be careful. I'd get sucked into mmos as easily as drugs for example.

      --
      "The space elevator will be built about 50 years after everyone stops laughing." - Arthur C. Clarke ~1980
    8. Re:Crack Team? by Phoghat · · Score: 1

      I think all drugs should be legal. That way all the idiots would O.D. and leave the world a cleaner place, overall.

      --
      Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
    9. Re:Crack Team? by Phoghat · · Score: 1

      His last name is Rockefeller.

      --
      Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
    10. Re:Crack Team? by Phoghat · · Score: 1

      You hang out with the wrong type of people.

      --
      Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
    11. Re:Crack Team? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Just need to be careful"

      "I can handle this"

      "I'm in control"

      Well ... until you're not. The house always wins, kid.

    12. Re:Crack Team? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Not any more,

    13. Re:Crack Team? by f()rK()_Bomb · · Score: 1

      If the house always won, then wouldn't there be more of my friends with wasted lives, I said only 2 ended up that way. Considering the vast amount of people who use drugs now, literally every teenager does, I cant imagine you are right that the house always wins. You are spouting propaganda from the 50's

      --
      "The space elevator will be built about 50 years after everyone stops laughing." - Arthur C. Clarke ~1980
    14. Re:Crack Team? by insertwackynamehere · · Score: 1

      Because of this anecdote you're wrong. Also what the hell, how many kids use crack on a regular basis? Yeah a lot of kids drink and smoke weed, we're not talking about the obvious here. PS: A good number of kids do use crack on a regular basis, they are the ones trapped in the cycle of poverty.

    15. Re:Crack Team? by f()rK()_Bomb · · Score: 1

      Cocaine and crack are basically the same, so thats a lot of young people. Cocaine is totally the new clubber drug like.

      --
      "The space elevator will be built about 50 years after everyone stops laughing." - Arthur C. Clarke ~1980
  2. In 1972... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    A crack engineering unit was sent to prison by a military court for a crime they didn't commit. These men promptly escaped from a maximum security stockade to the Los Angeles underground. Today, still wanted by the government, they survive as soldiers of fortune. If your circuits have a problem, if no one else can help, and if you can find them, maybe you can hire... The A-Team.

    1. Re:In 1972... by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 1

      I'm not entirely certain I like the idea of Mr. T fixing PCBs. Dwight Schultz, on the other hand... Okay, I'm sold.

      --
      Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
    2. Re:In 1972... by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 2

      I'm not entirely certain I like the idea of Mr. T fixing PCBs.

      Overheard in a remote jungle data center: "I pity da fool that soldered this motherboard!"

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    3. Re:In 1972... by Zephyn · · Score: 1

      I'm not entirely certain I like the idea of Mr. T fixing PCBs.

      You'll change your mind when you see them with armor plating and mounted machine guns.

    4. Re:In 1972... by g0bshiTe · · Score: 1

      Why on the bright side he has plenty of highly conductive gold on his person to fix even the most stubborn of issues.

      --
      I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
    5. Re:In 1972... by MrSeb · · Score: 4, Informative

      Just FYI, my use of 'crack' in the summary is _meant_ to be a pun. I know it sucks to point out jokes... but I wanted to make sure it didn't go unnoticed :P

    6. Re:In 1972... by Lashat · · Score: 1

      As you noted, but chose to ignore your own advice. If you have to point out a joke...it's not a good enough joke.

      --
      For every benefit you receive a tax is levied. - Ralph Waldo Emerson
    7. Re:In 1972... by RoknrolZombie · · Score: 1

      Thanks asshole...now the theme song is stuck in my head.

    8. Re:In 1972... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      you mean 'solders of fortune', right?

  3. a gallium-indium alloy by slackware+3.6 · · Score: 1

    Does not sound cheap.

    1. Re:a gallium-indium alloy by durrr · · Score: 1

      Used in very tiny proportions.
      Although possibly enough to expand a short circuit, turning that supposed battery saving miracle into a cascading disaster, blowing your leg off instead of just setting your pocket on fire.

    2. Re:a gallium-indium alloy by ackthpt · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      Used in very tiny proportions.

      Although possibly enough to expand a short circuit, turning that supposed battery saving miracle into a cascading disaster, blowing your leg off instead of just setting your pocket on fire.

      This is the way the world ends. Not with a bang or a whimper, but a BZZOWNNT!!!

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    3. Re:a gallium-indium alloy by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 2

      I think they'd probably design the circuits so that there wasn't enough of the liquid metal to reach the next wire over. That being said, this probably only works under normal gravity, so what you're suggesting might be something of an issue in space.

      --
      Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
    4. Re:a gallium-indium alloy by durrr · · Score: 1

      The wires probably break under shock most commonly, as such they'd be rather dense to not test various abnormal G scenarios, most likely transient high-G scenarios, in microgravity the surface tension is likely to keep things in order.

    5. Re:a gallium-indium alloy by Moryath · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And that's why this is probably useless for consumer grade electronics.

      I mean really - how often do you break TRACES in a motherboard or PCB in any home consumer product? I haven't ever seen a failure like that get out of QC. The things that kill consumer electronics are corrosion, solder point failure (usually from overpressured heatsinks or heat based warping, see RROD), bad/exploding capacitors, and the occasional power surge or ESD damage.

      MAYBE in aeronautics? Maybe maybe MAYBE in automobiles, if you have a PCB somewhere controlling a multifuel system. But for consumer grade home electronics? Not remotely necessary.

    6. Re:a gallium-indium alloy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Call to John.

      I know this hurts.

      Call to John now.

    7. Re:a gallium-indium alloy by eparker05 · · Score: 1

      Neither of those metals are cheap, even in minuscule proportions. Indium is about 80 times the price of copper at current rates, and gallium is not much cheaper.

      I suppose in some mission critical applications this would work, but I don't see this coming to consumer electronics, I'll bet it would just be cheaper to replace most devices than it would be to add this technology.

    8. Re:a gallium-indium alloy by EdIII · · Score: 2

      Considering the incredible marketing effort and designed failure in consumer electronics to always buy new crap, I really have to wonder if the average consumer electronic would survive long enough to need this technology.

      I have a Number Nine 128 video card still working on an old P4 server. That's damn near 20 years old I think. No cracks in the PCB on that.

      If I have motherboards that are 3,5,10 years old still working just fine and I fail to see the point of this technology in consumer products. Military and harsh environments certainly.

    9. Re:a gallium-indium alloy by Algae_94 · · Score: 2

      I recall a similar idea about a "self-healing" plastic that had microspheres with chemicals that would form some new plastic when they broke. These material advances are cool in that they make materials that are more durable and can last longer before ultimate failure. In normal consumer electronic usage, this material is not very useful like you say. Consumer electronic internals aren't subjected to a lot of physical stress like bending or shear forces and therefore are not a major fail point. In the testing of the material, they most likely happened to find that it heals fast enough to not affect electronic circuits, but I doubt that was their original intention.

      I think this sort of material that can heal itself is best used where an object gets physically damaged or worn down over time, not in electronic circuits. Imagine an engine block head that can stop a crack before it gets anywhere. To me, that is a much better use for healing metal alloys.

    10. Re:a gallium-indium alloy by jank1887 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      traces don't break. they suffer from electromigration. I.e., where the constant collision of electrons with the metal lattice eventually creates voids in the metal. Becomes more of a problem with higher power processors and narrower conductors. some metals are more susceptible as well. (aluminum more than copper, i think).

      And similarly, they would get hot (due to the high current density in the near break) before they break, and this heat could trigger the liquid metal release. There are applications for high-reliability electronics. I think the automotive sector is the one that most easily comes to mind for the consumer market. Long use equiment, like medical equipment maybe too.

      Also, don't forget, the equipment you have is designed to operate as long as necessary without the types of failures this would solve. Given this tool, could they be designed differently? More efficiently? Smaller? Maybe.

    11. Re:a gallium-indium alloy by fnj · · Score: 1

      Why would you suppose it only works under normal gravity? The wetting phenomenon does not depend on gravity at all.

    12. Re:a gallium-indium alloy by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 1

      Because I am not a physicist and assume blithely that everything obeys macro-scale Newtonian physics, duh.

      --
      Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
    13. Re:a gallium-indium alloy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The power socket on (clumsy women's) laptops and the wires on joggers' headphones.

      Always break.

    14. Re:a gallium-indium alloy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Traces don't usually break, but I have see cracked barrels (via hole walls) on 0.110" 24 layers PCB. When the aspect ratio is too high say 12:1 ( i.e. too small diameter for too thick a board) and the board is flexed, that can rip the connections from the via.

      The liquid metal stuff is very expensive. Not sure if it would short things/cause problems with solder joints/plating on a live warm board.

    15. Re:a gallium-indium alloy by Kneo24 · · Score: 1

      Oh, traces break. I've seen it numerous times - granted it's due to other sources causing them to break. Besides, if enough electromigration happens, you can effectively call it, "broken", as in it doesn't work properly anymore. Seriously, playing the game of semantics here is pointless, though it was a good effort on increasing the vocabulary of the community.

    16. Re:a gallium-indium alloy by triffid_98 · · Score: 3

      I mean really - how often do you break TRACES in a motherboard or PCB in any home consumer product? I haven't ever seen a failure like that get out of QC. The things that kill consumer electronics are corrosion, solder point failure (usually from overpressured heatsinks or heat based warping, see RROD), bad/exploding capacitors, and the occasional power surge or ESD damage.

      Agreed 100%. Its highly unusual for a PCB to fail, 90% of the time it's been bad solder joints or bad caps which can then escalate into other problems. Solder joints go bad due to heat or vibration or just being poorly soldered in the first place.

      This problem is going to get much worse before it gets any better. lead based solders help prevent joint cracking and they're now illegal in the EU. As a result all new electronics use lead-free formulations. This means more heat/vibration related failures than ever, all because more politicians demanded we 'think of the children!'(tm)

    17. Re:a gallium-indium alloy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod parent, -1 a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Electromigration is primarily a problem in ICs. These 10 micron beads are over ten time larger than most of the features on a chip in a current submicron process and it's rather improbable that these beads will scale down that far since said features are only a handful of atoms wide at that scale.

    18. Re:a gallium-indium alloy by koubalitis · · Score: 1

      this probably only works under normal gravity, so what you're suggesting might be something of an issue in space.

      It isn't gravity that puts the liquid metal in the crack but inter-molecular forces. Just like how paper tissue sucks water

    19. Re:a gallium-indium alloy by ogdenk · · Score: 2

      And that's why this is probably useless for consumer grade electronics.

      I mean really - how often do you break TRACES in a motherboard or PCB in any home consumer product? I haven't ever seen a failure like that get out of QC. The things that kill consumer electronics are corrosion, solder point failure (usually from overpressured heatsinks or heat based warping, see RROD), bad/exploding capacitors, and the occasional power surge or ESD damage.

      MAYBE in aeronautics? Maybe maybe MAYBE in automobiles, if you have a PCB somewhere controlling a multifuel system. But for consumer grade home electronics? Not remotely necessary.

      I don't know.....if they could find a way to apply this to BGA chips......

      Seriously.... the modern BGA package was the stupidest cost cutting measure in history that has caused the average laptop to last maybe 20% as long as laptops made 10 years ago. I doubt Taiwanese 6-yr-olds in the sweatshop X-Ray every board and make sure the solder balls are perfectly uniform.

      I want a REAL computer again instead of a disposable consumer entertainment devices. But since the consumer market is so large, pro users and hobbyists with a clue are not at all their target market anymore despite the fact that without the demanding, picky, quality-conscious geeks the home computer would have NEVER taken off. PERIOD.

    20. Re:a gallium-indium alloy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe not all consumer grade electronics, but there are clear applications for consumers and businesses.

      Laptop charging ports that don't break as easily when being plugged in.

      Those smart credit card things, which in normal use get flexed and rough handled. Any kind of flexible circuit board could benefit from it.

      I've seen and fixed broken USB connectors on flash drives. This technology could make a half busted off connector work well enough for a person to get files off the drive by themselves.

      For a delivery businesses, they often sport ruggedized laptops and handheld computers which get dropped, crushed and whatever else.

      Technologies that enhance durability, can instead be applied to miniaturizing things that would normally be too flimsy. Thinner, flexible device enclosures and thinner circuit boards. Plus cables and cable connectors that have less physical insulation.

  4. But Doc, we just need a little plutonium! by Gothmolly · · Score: 1

    Great, so we just need metric tons of gallium and indium, facilities to make it into a special alloy, then redesign all the circuit boards out there to be self-healing. Brilliant!

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
    1. Re:But Doc, we just need a little plutonium! by Kupfernigk · · Score: 1
      Only one Slashdot do you need to be told that "metric tons" don't exist - they are tonnes, and require no prefix.

      I have some indium, a sample rescued from a waste bin. I would really like a tonne of indium. You could buy an apartment with it.

      --
      From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
    2. Re:But Doc, we just need a little plutonium! by Lashat · · Score: 1

      Does that apply to the often used "metric shit-ton"? So, the correct usage would actually be shit-tonne?

      --
      For every benefit you receive a tax is levied. - Ralph Waldo Emerson
    3. Re:But Doc, we just need a little plutonium! by DRJlaw · · Score: 4, Informative

      Only one Slashdot do you need to be told that "metric tons" don't exist - they are tonnes, and require no prefix.

      Authorities who disagree with you include:
      The Encyclopedia Britannica
      The Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary & Thesaurus
      The US National Institute of Standards and Technology
      and about 16.5 million other hits on Google.

      For some reason, having the homonyms ton/tonne variously refer to a short ton (907.18474 kg), a tonne (1000 kg), or long ton (1,016.0469088 kg a.k.a. English ton) vexes some people. They prefer to specify a "metric ton" rather than so overemphasize "tonne" that they sound as if they have a speech impediment.

      The unit of measure exists by virtue of its pervasive use. The fact that you prefer an alternate equivalent does nothing to change that fact.

    4. Re:But Doc, we just need a little plutonium! by Algae_94 · · Score: 1

      How about they just start with bad solder joints that can fix the craptastic job done by the original manufacturers.

    5. Re:But Doc, we just need a little plutonium! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Authorities who disagree with you include: [several legit sources]"

      PWN FTW :)

  5. Re:Playing God... by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 1

    Dearest Jake,

    Are you even trying any more? I know there haven't been a lot of stories that are easy to troll, but this one is kind of stretching it.

    Sincerely,
    The Department of Evolutionary Biology

    --
    Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
  6. hear come the T-1000's by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    hear come the T-1000's

    1. Re:hear come the T-1000's by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You can't, liquid metal is silent.

    2. Re:hear come the T-1000's by tom17 · · Score: 1

      In space, no-one can here you scream.

  7. Not such a good idea by ka9dgx · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I know it would be an alloy... but Gallium isn't such a great thing to be shipping around in airplanes, etc..watch this youtube video of gallium eating an aluminum can for an idea why.

    1. Re:Not such a good idea by jank1887 · · Score: 1

      that's because it wants to be an alloy. it will alloy with steel too. but once it is a stable alloy, it can be just fine. E.g.: Gallinstan (68.5% Ga, 21.5% In and 10% Sn) being used as a replacement for mercury in a lot of liquid metal systems.

    2. Re:Not such a good idea by Menkhaf · · Score: 1

      MOD PARENT UP!!!!1111 Look at what common table salt does to water! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JD85OUkEKKw (oh wait, NaCl != Na -- just like gallium != a gallium alloy)

      --
      A proud member of the Onion-in-Hand alliance
  8. Delivery mechanism is what? by davewoods · · Score: 2

    The liquid metal oozes

    Sounds a lot like gravity is the main mechanism for deploying the liquid, in which case any circuit that is not facing "Up" cannot utilize this technology otherwise the liquid will just pour whichever direction is down, which is not always toward the circuit... Or am I just understanding this concept incorrectly?

    1. Re:Delivery mechanism is what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      At those scales, the effect of gravity relative to static forces is very small. Very small amounts of liquid metal would spread in any orientation. For those who've soldered, you'll know that solder spreads through wires regardless of which way they're oriented. It takes to the surfaces. Only when you add too much does gravity begin to play a substantial role.

      I agree with another poster that whetting is going to be the hardest problem. Although knowing gallium, it's possible that their technique will allow it to alloy with the existing metal and for an amalgam, in essence actually permanently repairing the trace. One would have to experiment to know for sure, but it seems likely that this is the mechanism that is used.

    2. Re:Delivery mechanism is what? by davewoods · · Score: 2

      I double checked the size of the capsules after I posted and thought about static as a possibility, but I did not want to accidentally sound like a moron, I would rather sound like an uninformed nerd that wants to learn.
      Thanks for the response confirming my thoughts!

    3. Re:Delivery mechanism is what? by Kneo24 · · Score: 1

      Someone mod this AC up as informative. They're spot on.

  9. Ah yes, yet another solution to the wrong problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Ah yes, yet another ingenious solution to the wrong problem.

    The main problem these days with PC boards is the exact opposite-- tin whiskers growing BETWEEN the traces, not with traces breaking down.

  10. Doesn't sound practical either by Kupfernigk · · Score: 2

    I once worked for a company that tried to get something like this to work. Wetting was a major problem. PCB traces are prone to oxidation anyway, and if they are in buried layers then they are prone to surface contamination from the epoxy. Although in theory cracks should be clean surfaces, the GaIn has to get there in the first place, and in doing so its own surface may be contaminated. Even a very thin layer of oxide or an organic monolayer may well be enough to prevent wetting. I suspect that this will succeed up to the point they try to make it work successfully in real circuit boards.

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
  11. Soon we will be able to buy the Chinese knockoff by Tekfactory · · Score: 1

    And the formulary used will cause our capacitors to expand and leak self-healing fluid all over the motherboard.

  12. It's not _that_ self healing. by Minwee · · Score: 2

    What happens when it breaks a second time? Then it's just as broken.

    This kind of thing may help resist a sudden, one-time shock, but it won't do a thing to protect electronics from ongoing wear. Perhaps if there were a way of notifying the device that it had been broken so that it could quickly inform the user and void its own warranty then it would be more useful.

    1. Re:It's not _that_ self healing. by subreality · · Score: 1

      If it breaks a second time it likely won't be in the same spot. And if it was, at least you got the extra runtime.

      As for the warranty... What's the point of a warranty that's void if the device breaks?

    2. Re:It's not _that_ self healing. by Minwee · · Score: 1

      If circuits broke entirely at random without any reason at all then that would be a fair assessment. It's more likely that breaks will be a result of circuit boards being placed under stress as a result of design flaws, and that will happen in the same place every time. I know a number of notebook computer owners who would be happy to demonstrate this.

      What's the point of a warranty that's void if the device breaks?

      You're thinking like a consumer again. The point is that it gives the manufacturer another excuse not to honour an otherwise expensive warranty, much like the "water damage detectors" inside many phones which are sensitive enough to turn red if somebody sneezes in the next room.

    3. Re:It's not _that_ self healing. by subreality · · Score: 1

      Water damage detectors at least have a hint of it being the consumer's fault (even if they get tripped by other things in practice).

      "Warranty void if product breaks" is easily understood by the customer as "no warranty". So why not just have no warranty?

    4. Re:It's not _that_ self healing. by Minwee · · Score: 1

      Because pesky consumer protection laws require that one be offered.

    5. Re:It's not _that_ self healing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i'd be interested in what corporate background you have, which companies and corporate cultures you've absorbed, that led you to conclude "so that it could quickly inform the user and void its own warranty then it would be more useful."

    6. Re:It's not _that_ self healing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's the point of a warranty that's void if the device breaks?

      What's the point of insurance if you fire the employee before they hit the floor?

    7. Re:It's not _that_ self healing. by Hentes · · Score: 1

      There are millions of places where a circuit board can break, so it's unlikely that it will break twice in the same spot.

  13. EMP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder if this would provide protection against an EMP attack.

    1. Re:EMP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No, because an EMP destroys most of the active semiconductor devices (integrated circuits and discrete componensts such as diodes, transistors, thyristors, etc), and also many of the passive devices (resistors, capacitors, inductors) in a circuit. It doesn't just create open circuits in metallic PC board traces.

    2. Re:EMP by MacGyver2210 · · Score: 1

      I wonder if this would provide protection against an EMP attack.

      That is an intriguing and useful prospect. I would also be curious to know this.

      --
      If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can't be taken on its own merits
    3. Re:EMP by mcgrew · · Score: 2

      NO, EMP only destroys semiconductors. Won't bother resistors, coils, capacitors, or vaccuum tubes. If you want an EMP-proof circut, use tubes rather than semiconductors and you're good to go.

    4. Re:EMP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It certainly can destroy passive components. I have had my transceiver front-end destroyed by a nearby lightning strike, which generated a strong but local EMP, although it did not make a direct hit on my antenna or feedline. The tiny surface mounted inductors were destroyed, as were the surface mounted multilayer chip capacitors.

  14. Short circuit by bigtrike · · Score: 1

    How do they prevent this from creating short circuits under stress?

    1. Re:Short circuit by Kneo24 · · Score: 1

      In general PCB's are designed in a way where there's a layer of substrate (i.e. whatever the PCB is made out of) between that trace and the next one. I work with industrial electronics for a living. The biggest annoyance I see is when boards are literally fried from components blowing up. This can very easily cause the traces to go open. This alloy would attempt to keep the connectivity there which could cause further mishaps. The issue is compounded when the board is burned and the carbon in the board starts shorting traces together. Failures like open traces almost never happen, but when you have 100k+ of a device out in the field, even 3% failure rate can yield a lot of repairs.

  15. Skynet by AtomicAdam · · Score: 1

    Subject says it all. nuff said.

  16. Work for EMP damage? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Any way to make this work to counter EMP (electromagnetic pulse) damage? Seems like having a heat activated repair mechanism triggered by the electon pulse would be easier to control than a mechanical one... but I'm only guessing. Would be a nice cheap way to help protect against a "lights out" attack without going back to using vacuum tubes...

    1. Re:Work for EMP damage? by Frangible · · Score: 2

      EMPs are a greatly overstated risk, and science does not back Hollywood. There's a video of an actual upper atmospheric detonation of a nuclear weapon, that shows some LLNL physicists on a beach eating hot dogs and steaks. The nuke detonates and temporarily interrupts the transistor radio that's playing, and then it starts working again a few seconds later. No vacuum tubes required.

      The only "EMP weapons" that have done anything require direct conductivity (think Tazer). It's a non-issue.

    2. Re:Work for EMP damage? by Tekfactory · · Score: 1

      I get what you're saying, but what are the odds of a 1960s transistor radio that Gilligan and the Professor could fix with a soldering iron being a little tougher than whatever 65 nanometer or smaller process they used to make the electronics in your smartphone, desktop, laptop or tablet?

      I've also read the bigger problem is above ground wires taking up the energy and frying the gear in the homes and businesses those wires attach to.

    3. Re:Work for EMP damage? by ka9dgx · · Score: 1

      Given the built-in anti-static I/O lines on most chips these days, it's definitely a non-issue. You can walk across a room with wool slippers and an amber staff, and you might do some damage, but a nuke far enough away not to cause blast damage isn't going to be a problem.

    4. Re:Work for EMP damage? by EdIII · · Score: 1

      I think the bigger problem here is that you think Gilligan could help the Professor fix something. Kind of lost the credibility of your post there......

    5. Re:Work for EMP damage? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are incorrect.

      You obviously are not aware of it, but the weapons that were tested in the 50s and early 60s, prior to the atmospheric test ban treaty, such as the one that you saw footage of, were designed to generate optimum blast, heat, and prompt radiation damage. Any EMP that those weapons designs produced was entirely incidental to their operation, and was therefore a minor side-effect that the weapons designers noted, but did not try to maximize.

      However, as weapons designers became more sophisticated, and as miniaturized circuitry became more widely deployed in the battlefield, designs were developed that could produce many orders of magnitude greater EMP effects, but with minimum blast, heat, and radiation. These designs would cripple any civilian equipment that was not specifically hardened to withstand them.

      Do not make the sophomoric error of taking your lack of knowledge as if it were evidence that moderm EMP weapons would not wreak havoc on civilian electronic infrastructure.

    6. Re:Work for EMP damage? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      I've also read the bigger problem is above ground wires taking up the energy and frying the gear in the homes and businesses those wires attach to.

      More likely the fires are cause by short circuts in the power transistors or power supply diodes, causing high voltage to run through wires that just aren't big enough to hanle the voltage.

      Semiconductors are extremely sensitive to heat and overvoltage, other components not so much at all.

    7. Re:Work for EMP damage? by fnj · · Score: 1

      Yes; EMP is an electromagnetic phenomenon whose electrical component is measured in volts per meter, just like the field from a radio or TV transmitter. It is the length of the "antenna" which the EMP intersects that determines the amount of electrical energy induced into the circuit. A long power line will induce a hell of a jolt. A transmitter or receiver with a whip antenna, or anything with any kind of antenna coming out of it, or something electrically connected to something else which it is not immediately adjacent to, is next. A small, self contained piece of electrical apparatus like a pocket radio, cell phone, typical self contained GPS unit, etc, is way down the totem pole for damage.

    8. Re:Work for EMP damage? by smellsofbikes · · Score: 1

      Starfish Prime, an atmospheric nuclear test in 1962, results: "electromagnetic pulse also made those effects known to the public by causing electrical damage in Hawaii, about 1,445 kilometres (898 mi) away from the detonation point, knocking out about 300 streetlights, setting off numerous burglar alarms and damaging a telephone company microwave link. The EMP-damaged microwave link shut down telephone calls from Kauai to the other Hawaiian islands."

      I'm not sure it's a non-issue, particularly given that modern electronics have geometries that are at least two orders of magnitude smaller than anything in 1962, so should be damaged by two orders of magnitude less voltage gradient, and modern weapons designers have apparently made weapons that are optimized for higher EMP, so I would expect that a modern EMP blast would be larger, and electronics more suseptible, than a blast that demonstrably did cause damage to electronics.

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
    9. Re:Work for EMP damage? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Small scale directed EMP weapons have already been developed and tested - they are "pinch" type warheads mounted on cruise missiles that are designed to take down power stations, communications and fixed air defenses IIRC. Saw an article about them back in 2003 or 2004.

      Having spoke to a knowledgable person concerning the effects of EMP on semiconductors, it seems like this wouldn't work, since there is simply too much "wiring" (read that as lines and interconnects in the chip) to protect. Metal faraday caging around the chip would work, but it's too expensive to make the design changes required and quite simply not a priority.

      As for the effects of EMP on everything else - apparently replacing all the electrical power lines, transformers, sub stations and power plants in the country would be the first hurdle before you started worring about consumer electronics... of course, you won't have any functioning equipment to DO all that, but I digress.

      The whole "Hollywood hype" attitude dismissing the risk is off the mark too. If anything, nobody prepares against EMP because quite simply there's no reasonable defense against it apart from preventing it from happening in the first place. Protecting the infrastructure is a staggeringly huge and unaffordable proposition which would be a "waste of money" if it never happens, so of course the logical political assumption to make is that it never WILL happen. Ostrich meet sand, sand, Ostrich.

    10. Re:Work for EMP damage? by _0xd0ad · · Score: 1

      The nuke detonates and temporarily interrupts the transistor radio that's playing, and then it starts working again a few seconds later ... The only "EMP weapons" that have done anything require direct conductivity (think Tazer).

      Okay, but how well does a transistor radio work after being microwaved on high for a few seconds? No direct conductivity required...

    11. Re:Work for EMP damage? by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

      The whole "Hollywood hype" attitude dismissing the risk is off the mark too. If anything, nobody prepares against EMP because quite simply there's no reasonable defense against it apart from preventing it from happening in the first place. Protecting the infrastructure is a staggeringly huge and unaffordable proposition which would be a "waste of money" if it never happens, so of course the logical political assumption to make is that it never WILL happen. Ostrich meet sand, sand, Ostrich.

      The EMP commission assessment disagrees with your conclusion. It says where EMI protection is baked into the design of product it normally adds little overall cost. Retrofit of existing product is cost prohibitive.

      A good example of hollywood being wrong is cars being rendered useless especially new cars with all their "fancy" electronics. Well you know what the EMP commission actually tested "new" cars under the highest field strength their testbed was able to produce and not a single one of the dozens of vechicles tested suffered permanent damage preventing the vechicle from functioning. During the test one or two of them stalled and needed to be restarted. This is because there are already stringent EMI shielding requirements the automotive industry must follow.

      Even computers tested were not fried. They rebooted, there were display issues and some of the NICs become unreliable or stopped working due to large induced currents in long ethernet runs. Fiber is not much more expensive than copper and MOVs in circut breakers are effective in stopping induced currents in mains from blowing up your computer. The same way they are effective against induced currents from nearby lightning strikes.

      People often point to a past with less transisters and conclude the modern erra is necessarily worse off from an EMP standpoint than it was 50 years ago. The truth is EMI tolerance and effectiveness of protection circuits has progressed steadily for separate operational reasons over the years and it will continue to do so.

      Portable electronics is mostly uneffected except for RF gear with antennas attached which has a tendance to get fried.

      I don't disagree a large scale EMP is a bad day it would most likely knock out the entire grid which even if completely undamaged would itself take days or weeks to effectivly restart and you can expect lots of physical damage.

      However the hollywood notion that EMP = Stone age does not seem to be supported by real world testing.

    12. Re:Work for EMP damage? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The common semiconductor device (read that as a chip after it has been assembled into the packaging) has MILES of metal wiring inside it. All of those copper "wires" are micron to sub micron in size, interconnected, and VERY susceptible to EMP.

    13. Re:Work for EMP damage? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since 1962, electronic devices have shrunk every couple years (look up "Moore's Law") to the point that the newest being developed now are almost down to single digit nanometer (1000th of 1000th of an inch) size. 15 years ago devices were 2.5 to 5 microns in size, for comparison purposes. The number of devices on a single die have grown proportionally as well.

    14. Re:Work for EMP damage? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The key point you missed:

      "...under the highest field strength their testbed was able to produce..."

      This testing is designed to make sure that NORMAL EM radiation does not effect cars - microwave towers, radar, and other similar emission sources. Yes, new devices all have to be resistant to radiation sources much higher than they would normally be exposed to in order to qualify just to be on the safe side.

      Now, ask yourself if those same devices would be able to survive a lightning strike, and then picture lightning striking everywhere, all at once. The longer the wire, the bigger the antenna... and modern electronics have miles of wiring inside their chips. Fiber connections ARE immune to EMP, which is good. Unfortunately the devices at either end of the fiber are not, nor are the switches, repeaters and other associated in line hardware.

      Hollywood is unfortunately pretty on the mark with this one.

  17. Useless in the real world by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    While this has a certain cool factor it is pretty impractical. The chances of a copper trace failing due to shock or vibration are much smaller then the chances of the components that are soldered down failing. Copper is quite malleable. By the time you have deformed a PCB enough to destroy a trace you have probably cracked every surface mount part on the board.

  18. printers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I guess we'll be stuck with "PC Load Letter" forever now

  19. Won't make a difference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Having this "failsafe" technology won't make any difference in most motherboard markets for one simple reason: it will cost more. A good parallel example: we all know the effect cheap capacitors have had on circuit failures. I have two LCD monitors at the school I administer fail in the last three months due to bad caps. There are plenty of good quality capacitors out there, but manufacturers don't use them when they cost $.05 or $.10 cents more a pop. Multiply that by the hundreds-of-thousands that are made yearly, and you save yourself tens of thousands of dollars.

    Even if "self-healing" motherboards were made, and made effectively, the only market that would be willing to invest in the extra costs is the server market, where $100 more invested in redundance has the potential to save $10,000+ from lost business due to downtime.

  20. Doesn't add up by Asic+Eng · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The article states this technology is intended to automatically repair integrated circuits via "microcapsules, as small as 10 microns in diameter". Being charitable and going with 90 nm geometries (which we still used in our company last year - we are a bit slow) that's too large by a factor of 100. Interesting for PCBs, but not for integrated circuits.

    The article also states that the technology would fix things "so fast that the user never knew there was a problem" and then explains that "a failure interrupts current for mere microseconds".

    The summary corrupts that somewhat into the claim that "operation can continue without interruption". It's far too slow for that. Let's assume a rather slow 33 MHz bus - that gives us a clock period of 30 ns - so we'd miss at least 33 clock cycles in this scenario. This interruption might not be noticed by the user, if an error correcting protocol is used on the bus and the system retransmits. Otherwise you would get wrong data, and you have to assume that will be noticed sooner or later.

    Interesting technology on PCBs or communication wires, I could see it being used in safety-critical applications. On integrated circuits it doesn't seem feasible. Basically you make the transistors and wires on ICs already as small as you can. To repair the wires on the IC you now need to insert capsules into the wires to do the automatic repair - so they would be way smaller than the wires. If you could manufacture these structures you'd make the wires smaller though and then you'd lose your ability to insert the microcapsules ... there is no way to win that race.

    1. Re:Doesn't add up by lurker1997 · · Score: 2

      On integrated circuits it doesn't seem feasible. Basically you make the transistors and wires on ICs already as small as you can. To repair the wires on the IC you now need to insert capsules into the wires to do the automatic repair - so they would be way smaller than the wires. If you could manufacture these structures you'd make the wires smaller though and then you'd lose your ability to insert the microcapsules ... there is no way to win that race.

      Along the same lines, if you need twice the room to have the capsule next to the trace/wire, you might as well just make the wire twice as thick and figure that this makes it tougher. To determine if this technology is worthwhile, they would have to compare time to failure between their system and one with traces that occupied the same volume as their wire+capsule combination.

    2. Re:Doesn't add up by Asic+Eng · · Score: 2

      Or alternatively, rather than making the wires twice as thick, you could implement the system twice and add some checker logic to find out if something has gone wrong. That's being used a lot on ICs for automotive applications, currently. (At least duplicated embedded CPUs and core logic - peripheral logic is checked with other means.)

      Also for safety applications you have to consider other fault sources like radiation flipping bits which occurs a lot more often than IC wires breaking due to aging. These capsules don't help with that at all, but having duplicated checking systems would.

      And then of course there is triple-voting (also frequently used in automotive safety for certain critical parts of the circuit).

    3. Re:Doesn't add up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      sounds like useless bullshit to me. Was that a public grant program for some foreign exchange students ph.d ?

    4. Re:Doesn't add up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would think a temporary break could mean that some other path gets overloaded and burns out other components on the board. I think speaking only in terms of user perception is a little to narrow. I would think that all kinds of crazy things could go wrong in that instance depending on exactly what was damaged, and what could go awry in that moment until the repair is complete.

  21. Skynet by Synerg1y · · Score: 1

    Finally has the technology to build the terminator from Terminator III (the "evil" one) .

  22. Oh come on. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    44 comments already and no stupid T1000 jokes?

  23. Re:Playing God... by jank1887 · · Score: 1

    really? I thought he was going for a +5 funny myself. please tell me he wasn't trying to be serious.

  24. Too expensive by tttonyyy · · Score: 1

    Anything that adds cost to PCBs is bit of a no-no - I can't see how the "self-healing" benefit can factor into any PCB design (especially motherboards, which have the least layers possible to reduce cost) unless it is for some specialist application, where using such tech would warrant the extra cost involved.

    Cool, but, lets face it - not going to be every day.

    --
    biopowered.co.uk - catalytically cracking triglycerides for home automotive use since 2008. Just say no to big oil!
  25. Let me explain by Kupfernigk · · Score: 1
    The gp has a sig which reads "Only on Slashdot does an AC get modded Informative for pointing out that the LHC is in Europe."

    The SI unit that equals 1000kg is a tonne. But the United States, in a fit of parochialism, has decided to rename it a "metric ton". To quote:

    Thus the spellings “meter,” “liter,” and “deka” are used rather than “metre,” “litre,” and “deca” as in the original BIPM English text; (ii) the name of the unit with symbol t and defined according to 1 t = 10^3 kg is called “metric ton” rather than "tonne";

    So, my little joke was in fact directed at the parent poster, who commented adversely on USA-centricism but used an Americanism for his unit of mass. Personally, I stick to the original SI.

    Perhaps you should rename them "freedom tons".

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
    1. Re:Let me explain by DRJlaw · · Score: 3, Informative

      The SI unit that equals 1000kg is a tonne. But the United States, in a fit of parochialism, has decided to rename it a "metric ton".

      The SI unit that equals 1000 Kg is a megagram (Mg, or 10^6 grams). The tonne is not an SI unit, but, in a fit of nostalgia, has been metricized and accepted for use with the SI system.

    2. Re:Let me explain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm no. 1000 Kg is a kilokelvingram.

    3. Re:Let me explain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is a metric ton more or less than a metric fuck ton?

  26. Re:Playing God... by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 1

    Well, yes, but it's still a mind-numbingly lazy troll. We can't just fork out funny points for just anything!

    --
    Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
  27. Re:Playing God... by mister_playboy · · Score: 1

    DoctorBob was better. :)

    --
    Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law ::: Love is the law, love under will
  28. Now let me get this straight... by rastoboy29 · · Score: 1

    Basically, this is a technology where, if a short develops and a circuit is broken, it will immediately repair the circuit?

    Are we sure that is a good thing?  If there is a power problem, for example, couldn't that just cause a new short to happen somewhere more expensive to repair?

    1. Re:Now let me get this straight... by zAPPzAPP · · Score: 1

      You put in fuses or fuse-diodes for that reason. A random crack in a circuit line is not a good safety measure against shorts.
      Btw, this does not repair short circuits. It maintains connectivity. In a short circuit, there is too much connectivity, not too few.

    2. Re:Now let me get this straight... by dominious · · Score: 1

      Are we sure that is a good thing? If there is a power problem, for example, couldn't that just cause a new short to happen somewhere more expensive to repair?

      That's nothing. Imagine when there is a power "problem" because humans tried to switch off the Terminator, and it just causes a new circuit to override the power "problem".

  29. Space applications by mangu · · Score: 2

    When you have something like a telecommunications satellite that costs $250 million and has to last 15+ years without maintenance, you aren't looking at the cost of materials for making micro capsules.

    You are paying upwards of $100 million / ton for the whole thing anyhow.

    1. Re:Space applications by Kneo24 · · Score: 1

      I'm curious, what part of their last sentence did you not understand? They already conceded on the point that in some critical applications that this would work, but not in consumer grade electronics. I think anything costing as much as you stated would fall under the "mission critical application" idea.

    2. Re:Space applications by painandgreed · · Score: 1

      Maybe he thought the first sentence was the summary and only read that as is /. tradition.

    3. Re:Space applications by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe he was thinking about getting himself a telecommunications satellite to reduce his monthly phone bill?

  30. Do it for the components. by Stumbles · · Score: 1

    It might be useful but in my 30 years of dealing with electronic equipment; I have encountered way, way more faulty components than a burnt or "faulty" run. Of the times I have found a toasted run, there was always a toasted component to go along with it.

    --
    My karma is not a Chameleon.
  31. That's nothing by SEWilco · · Score: 1

    My computer is so overclocked, I have a pipeline feeding this stuff in to keep repairing the motherboard!

  32. This is not for aftermarket faults. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Self healing tracks are intended to increase manufacturing yields. Reducing the amount of unusable PCBs makes the extra cost worthwhile.

  33. Add liquid metal to a crack - what could possibly by dbIII · · Score: 1

    Add liquid metal to a crack - what could possibly go wrong?
    If you can't answer that and call yourself an engineer then you don't deserve the title.

  34. Re:Playing God... by mug+funky · · Score: 1

    Kristopeit still shows up occasionally.

  35. How does this work? by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

    Isn't it better to focus on margins and making sure the worst case scenario is not capable of degrading circuits? If margins are a problem or electron migration is a potential issue be more careful and size your components accordingly.

    Even if the capsuls do their job they change the capacitance of the circut upon release right? 10-microns is hundreds of times the feature size of a modern process. So you don't know exactly what percent of the circut is restored you don't really have the capability to model the effect of worst case cap change when the "liquid metal" is arbitrarily released in one or more areas... and you expect the circut to keep functioning as it would normally with no sideffects? Maybe 15 years ago..but really on current and future processes?? Really?

    I would rather a system fail outright then become dangerously unreliable. If you need component redundancy do it at the systems level or don't be lazy with your margins.

    Improve the lithography and your algorithms if you want more reliability.

  36. Won't ever make it in consumer products by Nyder · · Score: 1

    If they ever perfect this technology, it still won't make it into consumer products.

    2 reasons:

    First being that it would increase the cost of the product, which cuts into profit.

    Second, they want you stuff to break and be unfixable, so you HAVE to buy a new one.

    Best use of this idea: Headphones.

    --
    Be seeing you...
  37. use it for the ARdrone by Gunstick · · Score: 1

    just a heavier crash, and the main board of the drone has problems. No idea what exactly breaks.

    --
    Atari rules... ermm... ruled.
  38. Re:Playing God... by Phoghat · · Score: 1

    Shirley you jest.

    --
    Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
  39. Re:Playing God... by MichaelKristopeit426 · · Score: 1

    ur mum's face still shows up occasionally. cower in my shadow, feeb, etc. etc. etc.

    kristopeit is a fucking boring troll, if a troll. so much so to the point that a brain-dead idiot could easily impersonate him. what a loser.

    --
    I am not the real Michael Kristopeit.
  40. Wishing you and yours a merry Christmas this holid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.aliexpress.com/fm-store/708019/other-products.html

    Welcome to Christmas, I'll gift! !

    Christmas arrived, and to support my friends and my friends love to say thank you walked into my life, I will do my best to give you unlimited fun!

    Christmas season, shop specially prepared small gifts, as long as the consumer in the shop, you can receive a small gift in Figure random sent, welcome all to buy.

    Even if there is no snow Christmas can also be romantic, with the blessing even feel warm winter, Christmas Eve I wish: May the happiness and your life accompanied! Wish you a gift mountains!

    http://www.aliexpress.com/fm-store/408333

    Alibaba International Station ID: CN1002276145

    Mobile: 13676944403 0371-55901796

    About US

    Q: Why are your prices so low, are these quality items and brand new?

    A: YES, you pay the FACTORY PRICE!

    We sell brand new items directly from factory in Asia. That is why our prices are so competitive.

    To maintain quality control we do personally inspect for each item prior to shipment. All items are 100% new and inspected.

    1.We guarantee 100% customer satisfaction. If your item is not as described or faulty when you receive it we will replace it for you with no additional charge.

    2. Many sellers supply grey market, We guarantee that our products are brand new, official and first-class quality.

    We want to thank you for your interest in our products. We are a new seller in this market, and it is true that you may have suspicions of our creditability, as with any new seller. However, we have the capacity to accept 10 orders per day at the moment and we can show you evidence of previous orders. If you need more proof, our suggestion is that you buy a sample product first, because the best way to verify the quality is when you get the product and are able to test it first-hand.

    We hope to develop a strong, long-term, mutually beneficial relationship with you. To simplify things, you can buy the product from us and sell it directly to your customers - we are happy to ship the product to them directly.

    If you think we can meet your requirements, please send us your order soon.