A toolkit for the electronics industry.
Is nanotechnology living up to its promises? What is the reality – which products are out there, how do we need to handle them and what are the benefits?
The more appropriate question might be, “Will I know it when I see it?” Most of the applications being developed are designed to fit with existing processes. User won’t see a completely different product, but they will see a product that is designed to fit seamlessly with the existing production line. These products will help manufacturers achieve better, smaller, faster and cheaper products. They could also help in developing new markets and “greener” products.
Why Nanotechnology?
Nanomaterials and structures are normally characterized by having at least one dimension less than 100 nm (10-7m). There is a wide range of materials and structures that can be produced by a plethora of techniques – hence the International Organization of Standardization’s (ISO’s) decision to call its TC229 committee “Nanotechnologies” and not “Nanotechnology.”
Nanotechnology is receiving increasing attention from companies, universities and governments. The National Nanotechnology Initiative budget for 2010 is $1.6 billion (www.nano.gov) and is matched by initiatives in Europe and Asia.
Part of this high profile is due to the strong dependence of “clean tech”– from solar panel manufacturing to reinforcements for wind turbine blades, from advanced battery and supercapacitor storage to a range of catalysts used in fuel production. Applications in the wider scope of the energy industry are diverse and include high-strength, nanostructured conductor wires and rechargeable lithium batteries.
The manufacture of nanomaterials can be top-down/subtractive (milling, grinding, melting and spraying) or bottom-up/additive (precipitation, deposition, plating, vapor processing). In general, top-down processes are more economical when dealing with particle sizes above 1 micron, but they bring higher energy costs and poor yields below 1 micron. Bottom-up processes, because of their additive nature, are the lower cost route for particles less than 100 nm but tend to be more costly above 1000 nm (1 micron).
Manufactured nanomaterials for the electronics industry can be presented as inks, polymer master batches or formats compatible with other conventional industrial processes. Nanoparticles are not generally supplied as powders because of the difficulty in handling very low, bulk density materials that have a risk of uncontrolled dispersion.
Nanotechnology and Electronics
The iNEMI roadmap (www.inemi.org) is a comprehensive survey that reviews the issues affecting the electronics supply chain. Gaps in the technology or the infrastructure that can adversely affect members are identified. The NEMI Research Committee was formed to prioritize and to disposition the tasks, as well as to identify companies, universities and government laboratories that can address them for the mutual good. Almost every chapter in the 2009 roadmap identifies aspects of nanotechnology that can enhance existing products or replace their structures or functions.
Nanotechnology in semiconductors beyond the normal, feature size shrinkage is again raising interest in electronics circles. The novel 3-D structures known as FinFETs are tipped to be used in the next generation of semiconductor devices and nanowire-based structures scheduled to arrive on the market in 2011/12.
These are highly complex structures made by sophisticated processes. Most nano applications that are reaching the market today are actually much more fundamental and are concentrated in the area of improved materials.
Small-sized features, around the wavelength of light, can produce very interesting properties. Below the wavelength of light, nanostructures can become invisible to the naked eye; band gaps in semiconductor materials can be modified to alter electrical and optical properties; metals can sinter and coalesce well below their melting temperatures and nanotubes and nanowires can behave as individual transistors. Structured surfaces can be scratch-resistant, ultrahydrophobic or self-cleaning.
Nanotechnology is a toolkit for the electronics industry, supplying the instruments that allow us to make nanomaterials with special properties modified by ultra-fine particle size, crystallinity, structure or surfaces. These will become commercially successful when they give a cost and performance advantage over existing products or allow us to create new products.
Naturally, every product containing an integrated circuit has a nanocomponent. What is surprising is the range of products that already have nanocomponents. Thin-film solar photovoltaic cells, for example, are produced from a copper indium gallium selenide (CIGS) nanoparticle ink, and the current collectors on conventional cells use nanosilver made by companies in the electronics materials supply chain. Cell phones may use antimicrobial nanosilver or self-cleaning and scratch-resistant coatings containing materials such as titanium dioxide, alumina or silica. Carbon and silica in molding compounds have been nano or near-nano for years.
We are now starting to see more mainstream products combining nanotechnology and traditional technology for electronics manufacturing in areas such as board surface finishes. The properties of these materials can be a significant improvement on conventional products, including lower energy consumption and materials use, reduced process time and cost, and higher reliability.
Nanosolder is a promising product under development, still some years away from completion but with great potential. The iNEMI Nano-Solder Project demonstrated that SAC alloys could be processed to make joints below 200° C, but significant process development and reliability testing is needed before this product becomes mainstream.
Clean Tech as an Opportunity for Electronics and Nanotechnology
Clean tech represents a huge growth opportunity for electronics. For the first time ever, alternative energy sources outstripped nuclear electricity in the U.S. (0.7 quadrillion BTU from January 2009 to May 2009), according to the Department of Energy’s monthly energy review. Alternative energy depends heavily on nanomaterials used in electronics structures – in nanosilver inks for current collectors for silicon cells, in printable thin-film CIGS cell materials, as well as in the conductors for the newer types of rigid and flexible cells that can lower cell costs below $1 per peak watt. This is an area of increasing focus for electronics manufacturing services (EMS) companies.
The biggest, fastest and arguably easiest bang for the buck to meet the future energy gap may be through conservation rather than generation. Technologies that can reduce power consumption, such as non-volatile memories, can make a major contribution, and materials conservation will also become an increasing focus. I recall the shock to the electronics industry, from 2005 to 2008, when we could not reach our road-mapped cost targets or price points because of dramatic rises in energy costs, oil-derived polymers, silicon feedstock and copper.
Our current recession is a blip (admittedly, a pretty big blip) on the inexorable upward trend in energy use worldwide. Once worldwide economies start to turn, expect energy and commodity prices to jump again, driving the move to energy efficiency and de-materialization – the reduction in materials consumption by using printed electronics, functional integration, microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) and other technologies. This also plays into another big trend we are seeing, an increasing emphasis on full life cycle analysis and sustainability. We can see the progression in European legislation, from eliminating hazardous materials in manufacture (REACH and RoHS) to reducing energy use (EuP) to recycling (WEEE).
As a result of these trends, we will need all the tools in our toolkit, and nanomaterials and nanostructures will be at the forefront enabling tomorrow’s electronics businesses to stay ahead of the curve.
Regulatory Compliance
There continues to be a lively discussion internationally about whether nanomaterials should be regulated separately from traditional materials. There are many opinions, and the challenge is in the diversity of types and applications, such as nano-sized silver, carbon nanotubes and liposomes, nanomaterials in cosmetics, wind turbine blades, medical image enhancement and automotive clear coat. Some nanomaterials behave differently below 100 nm. For example, silver can be sintered as low as 120° C, well below its 961° C melting point. Others, such as sodium chloride (which you inhale every time you go to the beach), does not appear to behave differently.
At the moment, products are registered under the EPA’s Toxic Substance Control Act, and if appropriate, the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act. Only two materials have been singled out for special attention: carbon nanotubes (because of their unique structure and properties) and silver (because of the large number of antibacterial products being launched). Not all antibacterial products have been properly registered, including computer keyboards and mice. Expect many more of these to reach market as the Influenza A(H1N1) virus spreads.
The TC 229 Nanotechnologies Committee is at the forefront of the harmonization task. As with any new technology, there is a land grab by national and international standards and other organizations. ISO is looking to harmonize nomenclature, metrology, health and safety guidelines and communication (material safety data sheets, labeling, etc.) to bring some order to the process, but it’s a big job!
I expect that all nanomaterials presented to the electronics board fabrication and assembly industries will be in some way encapsulated as inks or pastes, in resins or as coatings compatible with existing processes and probably will not be subject to specific regulations.
New Product Qualification
Many nanomaterials have been developed because of their interesting properties, and companies have been founded on products for which there is limited market demand (technology push). This tends to produce leading edge products with very limited, immediate commercial potential. Work by iNEMI and others suggests the time for deployment in the electronics industry is typically seven years for a new product that fits with the existing infrastructure and 15 years for a disruptive product. Doubters only need to look at the intensive phase of lead-free solder qualification and implementation (1999 to 2000 – and still not complete for complex boards) or the implementation of MEMS devises in accelerometer applications – 30 years! The electronics industry is fast moving in terms of ultimate product development but very conservative when it comes to accepting new materials, devices and systems.
Companies taking the technology push approach are very vulnerable and often have run out of funding before revenues materialize. The traditional, faster approach may be the market pull approach, where existing solutions are sought for identified market needs. This conservative approach can result in a very small increment in performance which, in the end, may not show a significant cost benefit improvement for that particular application. Competitors do not stand still, and what looked like a cost or performance advantage against a competitor’s first-generation product may not look as healthy against the second-generation product they have been working on. This means a conservatively run company could be outflanked by a smaller, more progressive competitor. New supply chains could be set up with alternative technology, and we are seeing this happen currently in printed electronics.
Another approach is to take a parallel track, constantly reviewing technology choices on a portfolio basis and applying them to market needs. Technology platforms developed in this way, such as printable electronic materials, diamond-like coatings, carbon nanotubes or nanosolders, can be applied to several other business areas in addition to pure electronics (structural engineering, life sciences or energy).
A valid approach would be a large company acquiring an innovation acquisition that can be plugged into an existing range. A nanosilver-organic surface finish is more likely to be rapidly accepted when presented by an established supplier with strong technical and logistics support than by a start-up company. Recreating an infrastructure to support products in depth can be prohibitively expensive for a start-up.
In general, much of the industry innovation is coming from universities and small companies, the most frequent recipients of grant funding. These have surpassed the large company laboratories of the past that were once the major engines of growth and change. Often, cooperating with excellent government laboratories (for example, the Department of Energy and Department of Defense), a broad range of inventions make their way from universities to small spin-out companies in incubators, funded by research contracts of various types.
Companies that are too small or too new for venture capital funding, but too large for start-up funding, need to develop significant sales to reach the kind of metrics that will attract VC financing. Partnering with an established company to develop data to support sales is the only way most of can grow. In large organizations, there is often pressure to reduce the number of vendors and reluctance to support a new company with a short track record. This is where those who work for the major electronics companies can really make a difference to facilitate cooperation and to accelerate the commercialization process.
Alan Rae is a managing member with TPF Enterprises LLC; This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..
