Sadly, yet another shiny penny, another in the 30+ year search for an alternative to optical. Not sure whether this is due to ADD on the part of lithographers, or simply the "nice from far but from nice" syndrome of those without perspective. We have poured billions into X-ray (a.k.a. EUV) without commercial success. What makes anyone think you can start with yet another shiny penny at the 10nm node? Its bizarre. The only technologies that can succeed are those built on the optical lithography infrastructure. There is only one.
We are fast approaching the lower limit, since the crystalline lattice of silicon, for instance, has a spacing of about 0.5 nm. But scientists who work with these tiny dimensions call .5nm, 5 angstroms, and the atoms themselves are much much smaller--measured in hundreds of picometers (1pm = 1/100th of an angstrom).
SRC claims this is the first production ready use of directed self assembly--that previous demonstrations were just test structures, but that Stanford's technique is ready for 22-nm today, can be extended as-is to 14-nm, and is being developed for single-digit geometries by formulating new co-polymers.
"Directed self-assembly (DSA)—a technology based on a concept that was virtually unknown outside of research labs a few years ago..."
What are the engineering and design challenges in creating successful IoT devices? These devices are usually small, resource-constrained electronics designed to sense, collect, send, and/or interpret data. Some of the devices need to be smart enough to act upon data in real time, 24/7. Are the design challenges the same as with embedded systems, but with a little developer- and IT-skills added in? What do engineers need to know? Rick Merritt talks with two experts about the tools and best options for designing IoT devices in 2016. Specifically the guests will discuss sensors, security, and lessons from IoT deployments.