Myriad scientists and researchers have explored the use of graphene as a substitute for silicon in electronics since 3D graphite was theorized to have electrical properties in 1947. But only in the last few years or so have great strides been made in graphene's capabilities. These advancements were due in part to the research of Professor Andre Geim and Dr. Konstantin Novoselov from Manchester University, who won the Nobel Prize for experiments on the two-dimensional material graphene in 2010. The pair was able to grab small graphene sheets from graphite using Scotch tape in an effort to fabricate a working transistor. This essentially paved the way for other researchers to develop methods of incorporating the material even into stretchable electronics.
An atomic microscope image of graphene trenches at 18nm deep. Graphene is grown across the trenches. (Source: Georgia Tech)
In a paper published in 2011, a group of scientists based at Soongsil University in Seoul, South Korea, and led by Jeong Ho Cho described a method they developed to create a stretchable, transparent material containing graphene transistors. They fabricated single sheets of graphene on to a thin copper foil. Using photolithography and other etching methods, they placed transistor components (including electrodes) into the graphene layers. The layers were then placed on to a substrate of clear stretchable rubber. The remaining transistor components (gate insulators/gate electrodes) were printed using a stretchable ion gel. The group found they could stretch the material by 5 percent over the course of 1,000 times, and the material still retained a good electrical connection.
These are just a few examples of how graphene can be utilized and incorporated into transistors. The future looks bright for the super-material, it but doesn't bode well for its silicon cousin. As electronics become smaller and faster, graphene transistors will become the center of attention in helping that transition from old-school to fast future in the coming decade.
Lou, I've seen the same dialectic again and again between supposed silicon limits about to be reached at X.X process generation and the architectural fixes for same. But one of the main reasons silicon hasn't been replaced yet isn't technical: it's economic, And I don't mean the fact that the material is relatively cheap. The situation is analogous to other potential replacements, like electric and/or hybrid cars, or solar energy, or bioplastics and biofuels: the existing infrastructure is huge, entrenched, pervasive and profitable. Replacing it will take a lot of conscious, united effort, even if the replacing technology works just as well.
Graphene is the future. Forcing a band gap in the material was the crucial step.
However, now that it is poised to be used mainstream, how toxic is the manufacturing process of graphene? I read an article here at DN on nano-tube creation, and its bad. Graphene can't be far behind it.
Cabe, thanks for covering this news from Georgia Tech. Graphene, in various forms including CNTs, has been considered as one possible replacement for silicon for several years. This is a totally cool step forward.
The issue of shrinking transistor size and of stretchability are really two different things.
Over the last many years people have been looking for the replacement for silicon. It is interesting that this has not happened yet. Chip makers continually improve silicon manufactur and density. Other materials generally prove to be of a much lower yield or density or both. Gallium Arsenide was one of those. It could operate at higher speeds, but yield and density were poor.
The solution to reaching limits on clock speed has been architectural. Thus we have multicore machines.
It always seems to be a race between silicon getting better and something else. As you point out in the article, the first theoretical conjecture was in 1947. These things can take a long time before they go from theory to industrial use.
Last year at Hannover Fair, lots of people were talking about Industry 4.0. This is a concept that seems to have a different name in every region. I’ve been referring to it as the Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT), not to be confused with the plain old Internet of Things (IoT). Others refer to it as the Connected Industry, the smart factory concept, M2M, data extraction, and so on.
Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.