ngineering

without limit
Mechanical engineers can stake a claim for the
nanoscale frontier. But the only way to truly own it is
to dissolve the old boundaries among disciplines.

By Steven L. Girshick and Arun Majumdar

Over the past decade, there has been a remarkable increase in interest in
nanotechnology among the science and engineering communities, the
media, and private investors. The U.S. government now funds about $1
billion per year for the National Nanotechnology Initiative, and many states
are making significant contributions as well. Japan, Taiwan, China, and
countries in the European Union have begun funding at comparable levels.
Clearly, the worldwide perception is that nanotechnology holds tremendous
promise and is an important area for research investment.

Last year, the National Science Foundation held a two-day workshop in

Arlington, Va., on mechanical engineering at nanometer scales. After a
status report from Mihail C. Roco, chair of the National Science and
Technology Council's Subcommittee on Nanoscale Science, Engineering,
and Technology, 59 participants attended 29 talks and numerous poster
sessions and panel discussions.

By the end, there was a growing consensus about the areas within
nanotechnology where mechanical engineers were poised to make the
greatest contributions and about how to change engineering education to
address the new challenges that nanoscale technology represents. Indeed,
nanotechnology may change the way we think about mechanical
engineering altogether, making it a more multidisciplinary field, one as
concerned with atomic-level effects as electrical engineering or chemistry is.
It is crucial not to let the old barriers between disciplines discourage
mechanical engineers from exploring this new frontier.

Many of the challenges of working at nanoscale stem from the way physical
properties change at that level. When solids, liquids, and gases are confined
to regions smaller than 100 nm, for instance, their behavior can be modified
by the confinement. Properties such as thermal conductivity, electrical
conductivity, optical absorption and emission spectra, mechanical strength,
and viscosity are size dependent.
In the future, a nano-biological device may detect pathogens.

Many researchers envision that material organized at this scale could form
the basis for structures, devices, and systems that could have tremendous
impact on parts of the economy as diverse as information, energy, health,
agriculture, security, and transportation. They see possibilities for data
storage at densities greater than one terabit per square inch; for high-
efficiency, solid-state engines; for analysis of single cells that could form
the basis for diagnosis of complex diseases such as cancer; and for ultralight
and ultrastrong materials for vehicles.

It is fair to ask what the role of mechanical engineering in nanotechnology

will be. In fact, quite a bit of nanoscale science and engineering is already
performed by mechanical engineers.

For example, mechanical engineers have been essential in developing

instruments such as nanoindentors and atomic force microscopes, which are
used for mechanical testing, nanoscale imaging, and metrology. Issues of
feedback control of such systems are unique because of the nanoscale
precision required in positioning and the ability to measure forces down to
piconewton levels.

Mechanical engineering issues extend to instruments for nanoparticle and

aerosol detection and characterization, as well as to various forms of
nanoscale imaging. Magnetic data storage technology already has many
features that fall well into the nanometer size range, and requires mechanical
engineering knowledge and expertise to further its development.

It is important to recognize some unique features about nanotechnology.

First, it is the amalgamation of knowledge from chemistry, physics, biology,
materials science, and various engineering fields. It epitomizes the concept
of the whole being greater than the sum of the parts.

Second, nanoscale science and engineering span different scales.

Nanostructures and nanoscale phenomena are generally embedded in micro-
and macrostructures, and their interactions are important. The connection
between scales—nano to micro to macro—is also a critical aspect of
integration.

In addition, it is often difficult to isolate nanoscale phenomena as we do at

customary scales. That is, thermal, electronic, mechanical, and chemical
effects are often related to each other. By changing one, it is possible to
influence the others. This, of course, emphasizes the need for
interdisciplinary knowledge.

There are many concepts in mechanical engineering that are critical in the
development of nanotechnology. It is incumbent upon mechanical engineers
to provide depth in these areas.

At present, nanotechnologists can create simple

structures, like this silicon carbide tower.

One of the most important issues related to nanotechnology is systems

integration and packaging. Researchers have been able to study individual
nanostructures and have even synthesized building blocks such as
nanoparticles and nanowires. But how do we integrate these building blocks
in a rational manner to make a functional device or a system? This step
requires design based on the understanding of nanoscale science, and on
new manufacturing techniques.

One of the biggest challenges in nanotechnology is manufacturing.

Assembling large quantities of nanostructures in a rational and rapid manner
requires tooling, imaging systems, instrumentation, sensors, and control
systems. After nanostructures are assembled into functional devices, they
need to be packaged so that they can interact with their environment and yet
retain the nanoness that provides the unique function and performance.

These concerns are similar to those found in conventional manufacturing,

though there is a call for a level of precision that is not required by
macroscale designers.

POWER PIPS

The ability to convert energy between different forms—and the capacity to

use it—is the hallmark of modern civilization. Humanity will face a crisis in
the coming decades due to the rate at which fossil fuels are being used and
the impact this is having on the environment. Nanotechnology almost
certainly has a role in resolving this crisis, and mechanical engineers are
perfectly situated to capitalize on the opportunity.

It is widely recognized that renewable sources of energy such as solar

electricity and biomass will gain importance in the future. However, cost is
a hurdle to the effectiveness of such technologies. For example, the cost of
photovoltaics must be an order of magnitude lower than its current value to
make the technology competitive with fossil fuels. This could be possible if,
for example, silicon-based devices, which are currently manufactured in
high-temperature processes, were replaced by nanostructured plastic-based
photovoltaics.

If thermoelectric devices made of materials such as silicon and germanium

perform about 10 to 20 percent of the Carnot limit, they could be as
competitive as cost-effective solid-state energy conversion devices. This can
only occur if the semiconductors are nanostructured to control heat and
charge transport. Mechanical engineers who understand these challenges
better than other technologists, will almost certainly devise the solution.
The particles making up a silicon carbide film at top
average only 20 nm across. A polymer material (second
from top) is made of nanoscale layers. Each "carrot"
made by Georgia Tech researchers (third from top)
contains thousands of silica wires grown from a
gallium droplet. Another group grows nanowires by
depositing metals on a porous alumina membrane
(bottom).

One of the biggest environmental challenges that humanity faces today is

clean water. Nanostructured filters used for ion exchange hold promise for
removing contaminants. Their manufacture however, must be inexpensive,
and the science of nanofluidics must be understood to make these filters
effective for cleaning water. Mechanical engineers can collaborate with
biologists and public health researchers to resolve both these issues.

Another area of expertise for mechanical engineers, instrumentation, is also

key to tapping the potential of nanotechnology. Instruments that can probe
the environment with increased resolution and sensitivity lead to
breakthroughs in science and engineering. The scanning probe microscopes
invented in the 1980s are electromechanical devices, which require
precision actuation with Angstrom resolution, microfabrication of cantilever
probes, force sensing with resolution measured in piconewtons, and a
fundamental understanding of dynamics and control to increase imaging
speed and spatial resolution.

These stringent requirements are not limited to the microscopes, but apply to
any nanoscale measurement. For example, there is a tremendous need for
instrumentation in high-throughput imaging and measurement in nanomanu-
facturing processes to enable automation and process control. These issues
offer opportunities for mechanical engineers to provide a system-level
understanding of such instruments.

Other potential applications require a mix of skills. Nanoparticles and

nanowires exist on a scale similar to biomolecules such as DNA and
proteins. This suggests that the biological sciences can provide crucial
insights to the behavior of such material and that nanoscale devices may be
used for medical applications. For instance, nanoparticles may be used as
markers to study very small samples of DNA or proteins. Achieved in a
high-throughput manner, this could form the basis for biomolecular analysis
in extremely small volumes (on the order of single cells), which has major
implications for diagnosis of disease.

In addition, the combination of nanostructures and mechanical sensors such

as cantilever beams could be used in chemical or biological defense.
Nanostructures such as particles and polymeric dendrimers could be
designed as drug delivery systems.

Biomolecules could be used to perform non-biological tasks. Possibilities

include manufacturing, energy conversion, signal amplification, and
information processing. Many of these functions are already achieved in an
extremely efficient manner within a cell, thanks to the genius of natural
selection, but to exploit them in non-biological conditions is a nontrivial
problem.

Nevertheless, applications such as manufacturing and energy conversion

have always been strengths of mechanical engineers. Can we harness the
power of the biomolecular machinery for mechanical applications? Research
in this direction has already started.

Another field where nanotechnology may need mechanical engineers is

information processing and storage. When transistors reach the scales of 20
to 30 nano-meters (a scale that will be necessary to keep up with Moore's
law) quantum effects such as electron tunneling will lead to electron
leakage, and this will cost power. Higher speeds will also require
electromagnetic isolation, which will necessitate the use of materials that
have extremely low thermal conductivities. In addition, novel cooling
technologies that directly interface with electronic and optoelectronic chips
must be developed.

To create chip designs that solve these thermal problems, technologists will
need a basic understanding of how heat flows in nanostructures and across
interfaces. Mechanical engineers have just this sort of expertise.

EXQUISITE DESIGN

Mechanical engineering concepts also come into play in designing magnetic

data storage, which currently requires heads to fly over a disk with spacing
of about 10 nm. Maintaining such flying heights without crashing calls for
exquisite design and manufacturing of disks and heads, and fundamental
understanding of dynamics, non-continuum fluid mechanics, and surface
forces. This has always been part of mechanical engineering and is expected
to remain so even as the scales involved shrink.

One of the biggest challenges in magnetic recording is the so-called

superparamagnetic limit, which occurs when the volume of a magnetic
domain is sufficiently small that thermal fluctuations randomize its
polarization. This can be overcome by patterning the magnetic medium.
How does one manufacture highly regular magnetic bits with sizes in the
range of 20 to 100 nm over a disk surface with diameter of about 3 to 10
cm? The ultimate solution to this problem will be derived from mechanical
engineering.

But with all the ways in which mechanical engineering will be crucial to
unlocking the potential of nanotechnology, there are challenges as well.
University engineering departments must change the way mechanical
engineers are educated.

Although some universities claim to have modernized their curricula, a

deeper look would suggest that in most cases courses of study reflect the
technological needs of the Sputnik era or perhaps an earlier time.
Mechanical engineering programs need to ensure that their students are
given a solid grounding in the fundamentals of physics, chemistry, and
biology.

Approaches must be developed that cultivate a

different way of thinking, so that students can
develop intuition for phenomena occurring at
the nanoscale, as well as gain an understanding
for connections that bridge the nanoscale, the
mesoscale, and the macroscale.

For this to happen, nanoscience and

engineering concepts will need to be integrated
into existing undergraduate curricula. Topics
such as solid state physics, chemical
thermodynamics, surface forces at the atomic
and molecular scale, nanofluidics, and motion
and behavior of nanoscale structures—most of
which receive little if any attention in the
traditional undergraduate ME curriculum—
will need to be integrated into core courses
A gene gun developed at the
University of Minnesota sprays a mist
of DNA-bearing particles into cells.
Similar devices could be used one day
to spread manufactured nanoscale
objects across relatively broad
surfaces.
such as thermodynamics, heat transfer, fluids, statics and dynamics, and
manufacturing.

Textbooks need to be written or revised to incorporate this type of material

with the core mechanical engineering subjects. Requiring professors of
mechanical engineering to take graduate-level refresher courses on these
topics is not inconceivable.

Taken together, these changes will represent a new paradigm for the
education of mechanical engineers, one that, if done right, will increase
disciplinary depth. At the same time, at both the undergraduate and graduate
levels, students should be exposed to courses that bring in concepts from
multiple disciplines, and faculty and programs must find ways to reduce the
barriers to interdisciplinary dialog.

What's more, there should be a strong ethical component to this new

teaching paradigm. Like any other technology, nanotechnology can have
many unintended consequences that are harmful to our society and to the
environment. It can also be used in counterproductive ways that could pose
risks to the society.

There are many questions that we engineers must openly discuss: How
could nanostructures or manufacturing of nanostructures be harmful to
human health? Are there any environmental effects? Could nanotechnology
reveal information that infringes on privacy? If improved health diagnostics
and therapeutics facilitated by nanotechnology increase lifespan, what effect
would the result have on demographics and productivity? Would this
technology be accessible to the whole population, or be available to only a
certain segment of our society?

It is incumbent upon us engineers to pay close attention to these societal and

ethical issues related to nanotechnology. We also need to educate ourselves,
the public, and the media about what is realistic and what is not, and in what
time frame we could expect nanotechnology to affect our lives. It is our
responsibility to do so.

Last year's workshop confirmed the emerging consensus within the

mechanical engineering community that nanotechnology will have a
profound impact on society and on industry, and that MEs can play a crucial
role. Some major recommendations include:

• Sustained support from the National Science Foundation and other funding
agencies to maintain long-term, fundamental research in nanoscale science
and engineering;
• A focus on research in nanoscale science and engineering that addresses
the grand challenges that affect society and humanity;

• Development of education programs that incorporate the essence of

nanoscale science and engineering into undergraduate and graduate
mechanical engineering curricula;

• Collaboration across disciplines by both NSF and university departments

to expose graduate and undergraduate students to interdisciplinary research;
and

• Research that seeks integration across scales to exploit nanoscale effects at

the micro- and macroscales.

We live at an exciting juncture in history, one where mechanical engineers

can take the lead. What we need, though, is the foresight and initiative to
embrace important aspects found in heretofore separate disciplines. If we
can do that, the future of this technology—indeed, the future itself—will
belong to us.

Steven L. Girshick is professor and director of graduate studies in mechanical engineering at the
University of Minnesota in Minneapolis, and co-chair of the Nanomanufacturing Committee of the
ASME Nanotechnology Institute. Arun Majumdar is the Almy and Agnes Maynard Professor of
Mechanical Engineering at the University of California, Berkeley, and a member of the scientific
staff of the Materials Science Division at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. He chairs the
Advisory Board of the ASME Nanotechnology Institute and is a member of the Nanotechnology
Technical Advisory Group to the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology.

Mechanical Engineering and Nanotechnology

NOTE: Before posting a comment asking us to "send information"
about mechanical engineering, CLICK HERE.

The September 2004 nanotechnology special issue of Mechanical

Engineering focuses on near-term nanoscale technology research, but seems
comfortable with molecular manufacturing as well. Perhaps as a result, their
advice about the role of mechanical engineering in nanoscale technology is
also good preparation for developing integrated, multiscale nanofactories and
their products.
The issue's editor, in a piece titled "Far Out, or Well Grounded?" writes that
he's "obsessed with the idea of infinitesimal robots building objects from
molecule-size parts." He reflects, "But is that really feasible? No one can
honestly say." But he points out that "Work in the nanoscale is grounded in
the real world and real problems" and concludes, "Who better to make the
nanorobots of my dreams than the folks who already make industrial
machines in the here and now?"
The second item of the "Nano Bits" compilation is introduced thus: "The holy
grail of nanotechnology is the atomic-scale factory. Computer-controlled
nanorobots would assemble molecule-size parts to make all manner of
miniature products. A sugar cube-size manufacturing plant is not close to
being built, but scientists at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in
California have demonstrated one piece of a futuristic factory." The topic is a
technique for moving single atoms of metal from one cluster to another along
a carbon nanotube.
The advice on connecting mechanical engineering to nanotechnology is found
in "Engineering Without Limit".
"One of the most important issues related to nanotechnology is systems
integration and packaging. ....how do we integrate these building blocks in a
rational manner to make a functional device or a system? This step requires
design based on the understanding of nanoscale science, and on new
manufacturing techniques. .... Assembling large quantities of nanostructures
in a rational and rapid manner requires tooling, imaging systems,
instrumentation, sensors, and control systems. After nanostructures are
assembled into functional devices, they need to be packaged so that they can
interact with their environment and yet retain the nanoness that provides the
unique function and performance. These concerns are similar to those found
in conventional manufacturing, though there is a call for a level of precision
that is not required by macroscale designers." (Emphasis added.)
I'd like to add a useful comment here, but that quote says it better than I
could.
I found this paragraph particularly interesting: "[I]t is often difficult to isolate
nanoscale phenomena as we do at customary scales. That is, thermal,
electronic, mechanical, and chemical effects are often related to each other. By
changing one, it is possible to influence the others. This, of course, emphasizes
the need for interdisciplinary knowledge."
Thermal and mechanical effects, and conventional electronics and chemistry,
are of course statistical. So one implication of this quote is that statistics will
have to be replaced with an understanding of the individual behavior of
individual components. A deeper implication is that the physics you learned in
high school is not the right set of rules for the nanoscale. But that "physics"
was essentially just a set of engineering rules. New engineering rules will have
to be developed, perhaps forming new disciplines like chemoelectrics and
thermomechanics. But there will be rules. And like all engineering rules, most
of them will be irrelevant in many if not most cases.
Thermoelectrics, by the way, is already an engineering concept. The article
says that mechanical engineers understand the transport of heat and charge
better than other technologists, so "will almost certainly devise the solution"
to thermoelectric solar cells.
Structures with mechanical motifs may be useful in medicine: "Nanoparticles
and nanowires exist on a scale similar to biomolecules such as DNA and
proteins. This suggests that the biological sciences can provide crucial insights
to the behavior of such material and that nanoscale devices may be used for
medical applications."
A bold and very important statement: "Mechanical engineering programs
need to ensure that their students are given a solid grounding in the
fundamentals of physics, chemistry, and biology." This goes beyond giving lip
service to interdisciplinary approaches; the statement was not qualified, and
appears to say that all mechanical engineers should be thus trained. It goes on
to say that students must be trained to develop new intuitions, and that
"Topics such as solid state physics, chemical thermodynamics, surface forces
at the atomic and molecular scale, nanofluidics, and motion and behavior of
nanoscale structures—most of which receive little if any attention in the
traditional undergraduate ME curriculum—will need to be integrated into core
courses such as thermodynamics, heat transfer, fluids, statics and dynamics,
and manufacturing."
A well-trained software engineer will be prepared to deal with alien rule
systems. The good ones can learn the structure of a new programming
language in an hour, the rules in a weekend, and become reasonably fluent
and even creative within a week or two. This kind of skill is part of why I have
been thinking that engineering skill in limited highly-controlled nanoscale
domains could develop quickly. As long as what happens is visible and
repeatable, it's quite possible to learn whole landscapes of interactions
between very intricate and complex system components, developing and
redeveloping hypotheses and techniques on a minute-to-minute basis.
The level of training described here approaches the problem from the opposite
direction. The author expects that students will be able to learn enough from
theory to become proficient at nanoscale exploration and design--not just able
to plug numbers into formulas, but able to intuit how things work. Once this
curriculum is designed and students start graduating from it, we can expect to
see predesign of nanoscale machines be both more accepted and more useful.
This will accelerate the development of advanced nanomachinery.
The article notes that this is a significant advance from what's currently
taught: "Requiring professors of mechanical engineering to take graduate-
level refresher courses on these topics is not inconceivable." By contrast, many
current "courses of study reflect the technological needs of the Sputnik era or
perhaps an earlier time." I'll note that the mindsets of many current
technologists--including nanotechnologists--also reflect this.
The article ends on a note that's encouraging to me: "What's more, there
should be a strong ethical component to this new teaching paradigm." Both
unintended consequences and intentional misuse are invoked.
"There are many questions that we engineers must openly discuss: How could
nanostructures or manufacturing of nanostructures be harmful to human
health? Are there any environmental effects? Could nanotechnology reveal
information that infringes on privacy? If improved health diagnostics and
therapeutics facilitated by nanotechnology increase lifespan, what effect
would the result have on demographics and productivity? Would this
technology be accessible to the whole population, or be available to only a
certain segment of our society?"
This list is inevitably incomplete. I would add: "How rapidly can new weapons
and countermeasures be designed? Which will be more powerful, offense or
defense?" This is not to impose responsibility for all military uses on the
technologists; my concern is more practical: no one except the technologists
can supply this information. And without this information, a sudden increase
in our ability to design weapons could take political planners by surprise,
leading to geopolitical instability.
Molecular manufacturing implies cheap exponential manufacturing.
(Astonishingly cheap per feature; depending on the chemistry, ultimately even
cheap per pound.) This implies economic shakeups--first to industries,
ultimately to infrastructures and entire economies. Again, the technologists
will have to think about these possibilities so they can tell the economists what
to expect.
Usually, when nanoscale technology and molecular manufacturing appear
onstage together, I worry about confusion and miscommunication. This
publication is different. Perhaps because it accepts molecular manufacturing
as a straightforward potential consequence of nanotechnology, it has given
advice that is equally relevant to both branches. I hope we see a lot more of
this in the future.
Chris