Slashdot Mirror


Can New Metal-Air Transistors Replace Semiconductors and Continue Moore's Law? (ieee.org)

Will Moore's law really come to an end by 2025? Maybe not...

An anonymous reader quotes IEEE Spectrum: [R]esearchers at RMIT University in Melbourne, Australia, believe a metal-based field emission air channel transistor (ACT) they have developed could maintain transistor doubling for another two decades. The ACT device eliminates the need for semiconductors. Instead, it uses two in-plane symmetric metal electrodes (source and drain) separated by an air gap of less than 35 nanometers, and a bottom metal gate to tune the field emission. The nanoscale air gap is less than the mean-free path of electrons in air, hence electrons can travel through air under room temperature without scattering...

Using metal and air in place of semiconductors for the main components of the transistor has a number of other advantages, says Shruti Nirantar, a Ph.D. candidate in RMIT's Functional Materials and Microsystems Research Group. Fabrication becomes essentially a single-step process of laying down the emitter and collector and defining the air gap. And though standard silicon fabrication processes are employed in producing ACTs, the number of processing steps are far fewer, given that doping, thermal processing, oxidation, and silicide formation are unnecessary. Consequently, production costs should be cut significantly. In addition, replacing silicon with metal means these ACT devices can be fabricated on any dielectric surface, provided the underlying substrate allows effective modulation of emission current from source to drain with a bottom-gate field. "Devices can be built on ultrathin glass, plastics, and elastomers," says Nirantar. "So they could be used in flexible and wearable technologies."

The article also suggests ACT devices could become important in space exploration, since electrons would be unaffected by extraterrestrial vacuums and radiation.

Nirantar was lead author on a new paper published in Nano Letters, and believes that their new approach "means we can stop pursuing miniaturization, and instead focus on compact 3D architecture, allowing more transistors per unit volume."

24 of 153 comments (clear)

  1. Better For GPU Tech by mentil · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This reminds me of what happened with NAND (i.e. flash memory) a few years ago. Ever-smaller transistors hit a wall due to endurance problems (each one could only be reprogrammed a few hundred/thousand times), so they went back to larger transistors but started stacking them into layers. Now we're at ~96 layers, and it's expected that a few thousand layers is feasible.

    The problem with layering in CPUs is how hot each layer gets, and adding new layers is unlikely to help single-core performance beyond what cache can do. So, we're going to end up with low-clockspeed (to minimize heat) thousand-core CPUs... which will actually be perfect for GPUs, not so much for that single-threaded productivity task. I could also see this being used for HBM, which is already stacked.

    --
    Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    1. Re:Better For GPU Tech by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The problem with layering in CPUs is how hot each layer gets,

      Chips will have liquid cooling integrated into the die itself eventually. It's just a matter of time. ISTR some articles on this already, and that if you make water channels so small that only one water molecule can fit through at a time, there is actually less resistance to flow. So maybe they'll have MEMS-built channels on the actual die, and a pump or a heat pipe system...

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Better For GPU Tech by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      Yes I use it at work. Note that Office will preload by default when you install it. So it's in RAM waiting for you to start it up so that it feels snappier. Several programs do this. I disable that when I can because it can noticeably slow down you login. I routinely see hiccups when scrolling through pages these days (on OSX), even with 8GB of RAM and a solid state drive. In the past these applications would fit under 1MB.

  2. Re:What kind of stupid is this? by pezezin · · Score: 2

    They mean moving from 2D to 3D chips.

  3. Temp by markdavis · · Score: 4, Interesting

    >"The nanoscale air gap is less than the mean-free path of electrons in air, hence electrons can travel through air under room temperature without scattering... "

    And what about when not at room temperature? Seems like that little disclaimer could be what makes the whole thing impractical. A chip/board isn't going to be made up of ONLY these "metal-air" transistors, so it is going to generate a significant amount of heat or be near something that does. Plus, there is the overall environment in which the device will be used that needs to be considered. The article doesn't elaborate on this at all.

    1. Re:Temp by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 2
      I would guess that the higher conductivity of metal means the resistance related losses are lower, and thus faster and less heat.

      There is, of course, the problem of voltage breakdown if things get too small, and potentially, at very small scales (people talking about only room for one water molecule) electrons tunneling (due to quantum effects, you can't be sure if the electron is in the metal or in Schroedinger's cat).

      It is certainly interesting, but is it practical?

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
    2. Re:Temp by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 4, Insightful

      potentially, at very small scales (people talking about only room for one water molecule) electrons tunneling (due to quantum effects,.

      I believe this is based on quantum tunnelling. Fowler–Nordheim tunnelling in tungsten and gold devices, while using Schottky emission in platinum device. Whether this is because of the electric field strength needed is lower in platinum device isn't clear, as increasing the field strength tends to favor FN tunnelling.

      Its pretty interesting stuff, but will it work? That would be pretty cool if it does.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  4. Re:Moore's Law is irrelevant now by fbobraga · · Score: 2

    Home user already have professional-grade appliances now (they just don't know how to use it)

  5. Questionable headlines by WoodstockJeff · · Score: 2

    Why do Slashdot editors insist on making headlines into questions that aren't answered in the article? A headline is a super-short summary the story. The story isn't a question, so the headline shouldn't be, either.

    The story is, "Researchers believe new metal-air transistors could continue Moore's Law". It isn't a debate on this belief of those researchers.

    Oh, wait - this is a click bait tactic used to make something seem more interesting than it really is...

    1. Re:Questionable headlines by Whibla · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Why do Slashdot editors insist on making headlines into questions that aren't answered in the article?

      Perhaps they were hoping to stimulate a discussion between knowledgeable posters, one which weighed the pros and cons of this new (take on) tech, and perhaps arrived at an answer to that question. They might also touch on other, unasked, questions such as whether such tech is desirable, and what we might use it for - something a couple of people have attempted.

      The story is, "Researchers believe new metal-air transistors could continue Moore's Law". It isn't a debate on this belief of those researchers.

      "It", whatever "it" might be, may not be a debate about the belief of the researchers but if not it's almost certainly a debate about the reasons for their belief. I'd suspect most people who browse here would instinctively fill in the blanks: most, not all - there's always a few who come here to find something to be outraged about, and they can usually find something, then rage about it, while contributing absolutely zero to the discussion.

      Oh, wait - this is a click bait tactic used to make something seem more interesting than it really is...

      I'm sorry you find this story about new technology uninteresting. Leaving aside the possible reasons for that, one still has to wonder at your expectations when you label the summary as 'click bait'. What do you think people come here for, other than the comments, if not to click on the links to the stories behind the headlines? Click bait kind of implies the article is about nothing and that's certainly not the case here ... well, in my opinion anyway.

      I'll will add, my main skepticism about the article was regarding the following: "Devices can be built on ultrathin glass, plastics, and elastomers... So they could be used in flexible and wearable technologies." Hmm, 35nm airgaps in bendable materials - that sounds like a recipe for errors to me, and that's assuming they can solve the electrode tip melting problem. However, the timeline given in the article is, if not 'realistic', long enough that one cannot discount their ideas and short enough that it gives us something to look forward to. I for one will be interested to see how they progress!

    2. Re:Questionable headlines by Solandri · · Score: 3, Informative

      I'll will add, my main skepticism about the article was regarding the following: "Devices can be built on ultrathin glass, plastics, and elastomers... So they could be used in flexible and wearable technologies." Hmm, 35nm airgaps in bendable materials - that sounds like a recipe for errors to me

      The bend radius for things which are "flexible" on the human scale is so large that there's almost no bending on the nanoscale. Same reason fiberglass bends so easily. Glass in your experience with human-size windows shatters rather easily rather than bends. That's because a 1 cm thick window bent with (say) a 1 meter radius results in the the two sides differing in length by 1% before it breaks. But if you shrink the glass down to the 10 um (0.01 mm) thick, suddenly you can bend it in a 1 mm radius before it hits your 1% threshold. And the result is glass which behaves like cloth. (If you ever get your hands on an individual fiberglass fiber, you can in fact break it by tying it into a knot and tightening until the bend radius becomes too small for the glass to withstand.)

      For materials like silicon, the rigid crystalline structure results in shattering at very small amounts of flex.

      And I have to disagree with you, the headline was click-bait. It asked a question which TFA does not answer. TFA uses a non-click-baity headline: "New Metal-Air Transistor Replaces Semiconductors - A novel field emission transistor that uses air gaps could breathe life into Mooreâ(TM)s Law." That makes it clear the future potential is unknown, whereas the click-bait slashdot headline implies you'll get the answer to the question it asks if you read TFA. The click-bait headline was added by the slashdot editor.

  6. Re:Obvious question by MightyYar · · Score: 4, Funny

    what's a brand stamp?

    It's like a tramp stamp, but made with fire.

    --
    W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  7. Re:Moore's Law is irrelevant now - not even close by cirby · · Score: 2

    There are plenty of areas in personal tech that could certainly use a huge jump in speed and/or density.

    Virtual reality, for example - a tenfold (or more) increase in graphics processing power would make personal VR amazing instead of just fun. Standalone setups like the Oculus Go could have 4k-per-eye graphics, with high frame rate and roomscale tracking.

  8. Vacuum tubes? Rather, mean free path scaling by goombah99 · · Score: 2

    That was my very first thought. Except it's not vaccuum. Of course neither were vaccum tubes. You had to lower the pressure to increase the mean free path. But if you could make this small enough then you could just do it right in the air. And by going to high fields you get to replace therm ionic emitters with field effect emitters. So less heat. And again to get high fields at low voltage you need to go small.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  9. Re: The answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    The answer is that soon the Internet will be running on a series of tubes.

  10. Re:The answer by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

    Moore's law is an observation about being able to reduce feature size via photolithography.

    No, it isn't. It's an observation about the number of gates. It doesn't matter whether you decrease the feature size, or increase the number of layers, or just make a bigger die. All of these, of course, have happened over the years.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  11. Re:Moore's Law is irrelevant now by Darinbob · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Power consumption too! It's a major factor in a lot of designs today. This means fewer batteries, and less recharging or replacement. I'm working on stuff that needs a 20 year life out of a single small battery, and some that need to survive off of a capacitor for a few minutes after a power outage. The consumer oriented model of recharging nightly or constantly buying new batteries deserves to become a thing of the past.

  12. Re:Moore's Law is irrelevant now by Darinbob · · Score: 2

    Professional may also mean more security features, more customization, and so forth. These days professional may even mean less advertising and spying (which today are the same thing). It could mean less quality variance over temperature and age (similar to industrial quality), and there are some consumer products that just don't work well if left in the sun on a hot day.

    At a previous job we used compact flash for our device storage on a medical device. It was amazing how lower quality those things were when intended for mass market consumers, and things like "16x" speed wasn't even a standardized term. It took time to find one of them that came with an actual data sheet and that did the job as advertised.

  13. Re:The answer by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Moore's Law potentially has a long way to run - because semiconductors are still only a few layers thick in the Z axis and there are a lot more doublings left before we're dealing with "chips" that are solid circuitry feet on a side. Non vacuum "vacuum tubes" are far less sensitive to high temperatures than semiconductors, so building 3-D structures of them won't have as much of a cooling problem. (You still need to dissipate all the heat, but you can let the structure get 'way hotter to encourage it to migrate out.)

    Single Threading speed may be falling off its free ride on Moore's Law-like exponential scaling, as speed-of-light and electron-size leakage limits raise a wall. (Going 3-D will help some, by shortening paths, but not by a lot.) But lots of really useful computations are massively parallelizable. The should drive continued manufacture and deployment of higher-switch-count devices as the technology is developed and yields are brought up.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  14. Re:The answer by HiThere · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sorry, but your graphs need work.

    OTOH, even though Moore's law has hit a pause, that's happened before, and then a new technology showed up that reinstated it. The current problem with that happening is that local processing is sufficient for most current uses with current technology. Some new application will probably be needed to change that. It'll probably be called AI, but what will be meant by that is a bit unclear. One good candidate is self-driving cars. They would benefit immensely from smaller computers that were less power hungry. And there would be huge numbers of them sold.

    --

    I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  15. People are so hung up over “Moore’s La by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It seems rather silly. It’s not a statement of some absolute scientific truth - nothing really depends on it holding true or not. If Moore’s Law stops being true, it’s not as if Intel or TSMC or Samsung is going to be shuttering factories because their fabs won’t work anymore. Jony Ive won’t descend into madness because he can’t make things any thinner. Nothing practical will actually change, and technological development will continue to progress.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  16. Re:Moore's Law is irrelevant now - not even close by HiThere · · Score: 2

    Virtual reality is a real possibility, but they've got to resolve the vestibular canal disagreeing with the eyes about what's happening first, so people don't get nauseous. Some people can deal with it, but most can't without a lot of training, and some never can. And among those who can, a lot don't want to. Sea sickness isn't pleasant.

    --

    I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  17. Re:Vacuum tubes? Rather, mean free path scaling by ChrisMaple · · Score: 3, Informative

    Alas, modern small high speed transistors are not zero static power consumption. It's a substantial problem that plays a part in the speed versus power tradeoffs.

    --
    Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
  18. Re:Vacuum tubes? Rather, mean free path scaling by AntisocialNetworker · · Score: 2

    Not so much similar as identical to vacuum tubes (or valves as we call them this side of the pond). It's just that the scale is so small you can let the air in without stopping the flow of electrons.

    I guess computers will now be not only smaller, faster and sexier computers, but also sound warmer with more detail. All we need now is the miniature green felt tip pen :-)