Professor settles with Mitsubishi in LED/LD patent dispute

Posted by: admin  :  Category: Semiconductor Industry

NEW YORK, USA: Prof. Gertrude Neumark Rothschild has reached a settlement with Mitsubishi Corp. regarding her assertion that the company and dozens of other major electronics manufacturers in Asia and Europe violated her patents for producing light emitting diodes and laser diodes in products, such as video players that are used for Sony’s Blu-ray format, Motorola Razr phones and Hitachi camcorders, backlighting for computers, as well as street lighting and optical storage of information.

Mitsubishi is the latest company to reach a global settlement with Rothschild, a professor emeritus at Columbia University. Others who have settled include BenQ, Dalien Lumei, Epistar Corp., FOREPI, Guangzhou Hongli, Hitachi, Hugo Optotech, LG, Motorola, Pioneer Corp., Samsung Electro Mechanics, Samsung Electronics, Sanyo Electric, Sewa Electric, Sharp Corp., Shenzhen Unilight, Showa Denko, Sony Corp., and Sony Ericcson. Earlier settlements were made with Nichia Chemical and Koninklijke Philips Electronics, which included Philips Lumilid Lighting Co. and Toyoda Gosei Co. Ltd.

Terms of the Mitsubishi agreement are confidential, according to Rothschild’s attorney, Albert Jacobs Jr. of Troutman Sanders LLP. However, the aggregate received from her settlements and licenses — which now have been concluded with more than 40 companies — amounts to over $27 million, Jacobs said.

“Dr. Rothschild made a seminal breakthrough in the production of LEDs and LDs, especially the blue, violet and ultraviolet LEDs that are essential to a wide variety of consumer electronics products today,” said Jacobs. “She richly deserves both scientific as well as commercial recognition for her work.”

Prof. Rothschild, who is the sole owner of US Patent Number 5,252,499, as well as the recently expired ‘618 patent and foreign patents related thereto, is currently Howe Professor Emeritus of Materials Science and Engineering at Columbia.

She conducted ground-breaking research in the 1980s and 1990s into the electrical and optical properties of so-called wide band-gap semiconductors. This research has proven pivotal in the development of short-wavelength emitting (blue and violet) diodes that are now widely used in consumer electronics.

She was issued two US patents in the early 1990s that cover methods of producing wide band-gap semiconductors for LEDs and LDs. Such LEDs and LDs have become increasingly popular in a variety of devices as a superior lighting source because of their reduced power consumption, greater reliability, longevity and greater storage capacity.

Recognized by the American Physical Society as a Notable Woman Physicist in 1998, Professor Rothschild was elected as a Fellow of the American Physical Society in 1982.

Prof. Rothschild began her research career in private industry, working with Sylvania Research Laboratories in Bayside, N.Y., in the 1950s, and later at Philips Laboratories in Briarcliff Manor, N.Y. She joined the faculty at Columbia University as a Professor of Materials Science in 1985. In 2008, she was selected as a recipient of Barnard College’s Distinguished Alumna Award. She has published approximately 90 research articles and given 28 invited talks since 1980.

Another Beyond CMOS Candidate

Posted by: admin  :  Category: Technology

H. J. De Los Santos is with NanoMEMS Research and they have proposed a new beyond CMOS computer architecture called Nano-electron-fluidic logic.

Theory of Nano-Electron-Fluidic Logic (NFL): A New Digital “Electronics” Concept

A new digital “electronics” concept is introduced. The concept, called nano-electron-fluidic logic (NFL), is based on the generation, propagation and manipulation of plasmons in a two-dimensional electron gas behaving as an electron fluid. NFL gates are projected to exhibit femtojoule power dissipations and femtosecond switching speeds at finite temperatures. NFL represents a paradigm shift in digital technology, and is poised as a strong candidate for “beyond- CMOS” digital logic.

* Operates with far less heat and more efficient energies (femtojoules)
* Faster switching speeds (femtosecond)
* higher density potential for devices
* Terahertz operating speeds for chips
* Propogation velocity of electron fluid is hundreds of times faster than electrons in current CMOS
* Device construction is compatible with current lithography

Nano-Electron Fluidic Logic (NFL) Device patent application 2009026764

A nano-electron fluidic logic (NFL) device for controlling launching and propagation of at least one surface plasma wave (SPW) is disclosed. The NFL device comprises a metallic gate patterned with a plurality of terminals at which SPWs may be launched and a plurality of drain terminals at which the SPWs may be detected. A wave guiding structure such as a 2 DEG EF facilitates propagation of the SPW within the structure so as to scatter/steer the SPW in a direction different from a pre-scattering direction. A bias SPW is excited by an application of a control SPW with a momentum vector at an angle to the bias SPW and a control current with a wavevector which scatters the bias SPW in the direction of at least one output SPW, towards a drain terminal. The NFL device being rendered with device speed as a function of SPW propagation velocity.

* speed of the device is a function of SPW propagation velocity in terahertz switching frequencies.

A previous paper from 2004 by Héctor J. De Los Santos: NanoMEMS SYSTEMS ON CHIP

NanoMEMS exploits the convergence between nanotechnology and microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) brought about by advances in the ability to fabricate nanometer-scale electronic and mechanical device structures. While the “nano” aspect of this field is in its infancy, and is not expected to reach maturity until well into the 21st century, its “MEMS” aspect is a topic of much current and near-term impact in, for instance, RF/Wireless communications. In this context, we discuss the fundamentals of NanoMEMS, in particular, as it relates to its most speculative and futuristic paradigms and applications, and then focus on the RF/Wireless MEMS aspect, specifically in its role as enabler of ubiquitous wireless connectivity.

 

 


Legislative update – Sept. 2009 — REACH, RoHS2

Posted by: admin  :  Category: Semiconductor Industry

Guest post by Gary Nevison, Farnell

Summary
The legal obligations within the REACH Regulations and the potential impact of the so called “RoHS2” proposals dominate the legislative scene at present. Also, obligations are starting to filter through as part of the eco design/energy using Products Directive that monitors energy efficiency throughout a products life cycle. Going-forward, the scope of this directive will become more diverse to encompass energy related products.

Industry, and the design engineer, needs to be aware of developments and the potential impact on their companies.

REACH
Regulation 1907/2006, the Regulation, Evaluation, Authorisation -and restriction-of Chemicals (REACH) entered into force on 1 June 2007 after almost 8 years of debate and covering some 849 pages of regulation.

The only census on chemicals, taken in 1981, highlighted that 100,106 substances were placed on the market. Of those used, manufactured or imported at levels of 1000 tonnes or more, 21 percent had no safety data at all while a further 65 percent provided insufficient safe use data. Only 3 percent had been fully tested.

At the same time, instances of allergies, asthma, certain types of cancer and reproductive disorders were on the increase in Europe. Skin diseases alone resulted in the loss of 3 million working days per year.

Driven by the obligatory flow of safety data throughout the supply chain, REACH seeks to provide protection to health and the environment.

The biggest challenge to industry to date has been around the collection of data advising where a so called Substance of Very High Concern (SVHC) is present in a product, known as an article in the regulations, at a level of 0.1% by weight of the total article.

As a minimum obligation the name of the substance along with supporting safe use data must flow downstream through the supply chain.

Substances that are categorised as SVHC include those that are carcinogenic, mutagenic or toxic for reproduction. Also, substances that are persistent, liable to bio-accumulate and toxic, and finally “others” such as endocrine disrupters that can have a particular impact on aquatic life.

Back in October 2008, the first batch of 15 substances of very high concern was published by the European Chemicals Agency and, the following January, seven of these were earmarked for a consultation on whether or not they should be subject to a very costly “authorisation of use” requirement. These seven were approved and the European Commission will determine the date when these will be added to Annex XIV.

These obligations will then enter into force some 42-48 months later on what is known as the sunset date. Where such an authorisation is approved, downstream users can only use these substances for the use that they have been authorised for and they can only be purchased from the company granted the authorisation.

The REACH data collection has resulted in the circulation of hundreds of “standard letters” in a multitude of formats. Many manufacturers have refused to reply to the ad-hoc requests they receive preferring to promote websites or central databases (these have been slow to develop).

Guidance on the regulation encourages a more pro-active approach rather than simply providing a link to a website. Likewise, there have been many random requests for information that is not obligatory such as pre-registration details and RoHS style certificates of compliance.

Future batches of SVHCs will be published on an on-going basis, with the next expected early 2010, so REACH will not be a box that can be ticked as complete for several years to come.

“RoHS2”
Looking back the Restriction of Hazardous Substances (RoHS) Directive 2002/95 entered into force on 1 July 2006. It featured six restricted substances across eight broad categories of product pulled from the 10 categories in the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directive. There were 29 exemptions to assist manufacturers and design engineers where no viable alternative was available and a whole raft of “grey” definitions that required clarity.

“RoHS2” proposals look to move the directive forward and provide greater clarity. However, some of its provisions will potentially have cost and resource issues for industry.

The proposals recommend that the two remaining categories from the original WEEE categories, namely medical devices and monitoring and control instruments be added to the scope from 2014 (in-vitro diagnostics from 2016 and industrial “test” equipment in 2017). These were originally omitted from the directive due to reliability concerns over the use of lead-free solder.

While there are no substances actually restricted under the proposals, four are recommended for priority assessment. Three plasticisers used in a variety of applications and a flame retardant may well be restricted. Ironically, the substances, BBP, DBP, DEHP and HBCDD are four of the seven subject to authorisation of use under the REACH Regulations.

The fate of these substances under RoHS will be open to consultation after the revised directive comes into scope sometime in 2011-2012. Either way, any restriction under RoHS will probably be sooner than under the REACH process and the analysis is unlikely to be done twice.

Under a separate review by European Commission consultants, 29 exemptions will continue under the proposals, many with amended wording for clarity, 6 will be withdrawn and one new one will be granted. These could come into force next year and that will be followed by a transposition period of, on average, 18 months allowing manufacturers the time to comply.

In addition, a further six exemptions were added in June 2009 that had been proposed a year earlier.

RoHS2 also clarifies definitions such as equipment within out of scope equipment, spare parts and military where the latter clearly does not include dual use equipment.

A standard, and rigid declaration of conformity appears in annex 7 and will replace the multitude of different certificates, statements and compliance documents under the original legislation.

There now appears to be no scope for qualifying statements such as “so far as we are aware” and “to the best of our knowledge”.

It is proposed that RoHS will become a CE mark directive placing responsibilities on manufacturers, importers and distributors. There are many requirements including building technical files and keeping for 10 years, ensuring products comply, that they are supplied with the CE mark and the manufacturer or importer is identified on the product. Sample testing should also be carried out where appropriate, and corrective action is undertaken where product is found to be non compliant.

Finally under the proposals, the broad product categories and list of indicative products move from the WEEE Directive and sit in annex 1 and 2 of the RoHS Directive.

The terminology “RoHS2” is unofficial and is used simply to highlight the proposed changes to the original directive.

Energy using Products
Directive 2005/32/EC, Energy using Products, entered into force on 11 August 2007.

The main aim is to monitor energy efficiency throughout the life cycle of a product from the mining of raw material right through to recycling at end-of-life.

The focus is clearly on the design phase of the product since it is considered that this is the determining stage affecting the resources used in a product.

The directive does not apply to means of transport (planes, cars etc) but, apart from this, the scope is deliberately broad covering, in principle, any product which when in use depends on, generates, transfers or measures energy (electricity, fossil fuel or renewable).

Obligations on manufacturers will result from a series of specific “implementing measures” the first of which was adopted in January 2009.

The criteria required before a product can be considered for assessment is that is that it must sell more than 200,000 units per year in the European Union, have a significant environmental impact and present considerable potential for improvement. The latter is important as the target is for a 20% improvement in energy efficiency by 2020.

During phase one, studies were commission on 20 broad product categories ranging from water heaters, televisions and lighting, through to imaging equipment and personal computers.

Beyond that, a further 17 categories have been highlighted from ovens and hobs, machine tools and air-conditioning equipment through to transformers and networking equipment.

Among the first obligations to come in to force were energy efficiency improvements covering standby and off-mode losses, simple converter boxes for digital television, external power supplies and office, street and domestic lighting.

However, the European Parliament has now adopted the European Commission’s (EC) proposal to widen the scope of the directive to include energy related products. Until now the Energy using Products Directive was limited to products that consume energy during use such as boilers, computers, televisions, industrial fans and light bulbs.

However, many products have an indirect impact on the energy in use such as water using devices, taps and showerheads for example, and double glazing windows or insulating material.

Improvement in design could clearly result in the significant saving of energy.

For example, water saving taps and shower heads reduce water consumption and therefore the amount of energy used for hot water.

Under the EuP Directive studies had to set requirements for individual products where, in fact, it is the performance of the whole system that often needs to be optimised not just a single component or products.

The new directive will repeal the existing 2005/32/EC.

Intel and Sun Micro Product Roadmap Updates

Posted by: admin  :  Category: Technology

Intel will use its upcoming Intel Developer Forum to highlight several key developments in its product roadmap — starting with smaller, more efficient chip designs and specialized applications for its Nehalem line.

* Intel will show off “Westmere,” the first processors built using a 32 nanometer (nm) manufacturing process.
* CPU manufacturing shrank from 65nm to 45nm to 32nm and next to 22nm.
* The next chip architecture will come in 2010, in the form of the new architecture codenamed “Sandy Bridge,” which will also be disclosed at this month’s IDF. Intel’s roadmap is process shrinkage and then better architecture and then process shrink etc… (tick-tock)
* This new-generation high-k metal gate transistor formula will give Intel “a 3+ year advantage in addressing leaky and energy inefficient transistors,” according to a blog post from Intel spokesman Bill Kircos Intel has shipped >200 million 45nm CPUs using high-k+ metal gate transistors.
* For the first time, Intel has developed a full-featured SoC process technology to complement the CPU-specific technology. This version is for our smarter System on Chip (SoC) product efforts, which emphasize lower power transistors
* Intel NMOS transistors now have 19% performance improvement over their 45nm counterparts and our PMOS transistors now have a 28% performance improvement over their 45nm counterparts.
* Another IDF highlight: Nehalem-based chips codenamed “Jasper Forest” and designed for the embedded and storage sectors. This family of products will bring Nehalem to the embedded market, offering integrated PCI Express (PCIe) and an integrated I/O hub in a dual-processor Xeon processor.
* Nehalem will allow for much faster and denser storage and communications solutions such as IPTV, VoIP, NAS, SAN and wireless radio network controllers

The UK Register has information on the Sun Sparc Roadmap. The 16-core “Rock” UltraSparc-RK processor for Sun’s once-and-never “Supernova” line of servers is not on the roadmap. The one-page roadmap is one given Sun’s customers – and presumably also Fujitsu’s customers – have been shown about the future Sparc processor lineup.

June 2009 Sun Roadmap

A long way off in late 2010 or early 2011, the Sparc Enterprise server lineup gets a speed boost to 3 GHz with the Jupiter-E chips.

After that, in 2012, Sun has made no commitment to the kicker line of Fujitsu “Advanced Product Line 2″ servers coming from Fujitsu. These APL2 machines are presumably to be based on the “Venus” eight-core Sparc64-VIII processor, which has a Sparc64-VIIIfx variant aimed at supercomputers. That Sparc64-VIIIfx chip will be used in a 10 petaflops massively parallel machine being built by Fujitsu and paid for by the Japanese government under the 1.2bn Project Keisoku effort.

All of this is subject to change, and some of it most certainly will once Oracle takes control of Sun.

 
 


Aubrey de Grey now calls Actuarial Escape Velocity, the Methuselarity

Posted by: admin  :  Category: Technology

Fighting Aging reports that Aubrey de Grey has a new term for actual escape velocity, Methuselarity

A recent issue of Studies in Health Technology and Informatics includes a number of interesting papers on longevity science, or that relate to developing the tools and research community to enable engineered longevity. You might start with an essay by Aubrey de Grey, in which he coins a new term for an aspect what has in the past been called actuarial escape velocity – the point at which steadily increasing life expectancy rises by more than one year with each passing year:

Aging, being a composite of innumerable types of molecular and cellular decay, will be defeated incrementally. I have for some time predicted that this succession of advances will feature a threshold, which I here christen the ‘Methuselarity,’ following which there will actually be a progressive decline in the rate of improvement in our anti-aging technology that is required to prevent a rise in our risk of death from age-related causes as we become chronologically older. Various commentators have observed the similarity of this prediction to that made by Good, Vinge, Kurzweil and others concerning technology in general (and, in particular, computer technology), which they have termed the ’singularity.’ In this essay I compare and contrast these two concepts.

At present, life expectancy is increasing at about one year for every five years that pass – only 20% of what is needed to keep our expected remaining years of life increasing at the same speed with which we age. That said, it is worth remembering that life expectancy is a statistical construct based on past data – it is a helpful measure of progress, but not necessarily an indication of where we are now. I suspect it lags present medical advances, for example, because their effects on mortality rate might not show up for a decade or more.

The Singularity and the Methuselarity: Similarities and Differences

Aging, being a composite of innumerable types of molecular and cellular decay, will be defeated incrementally. I have for some time predicted that this succession of advances will feature a threshold, which I here christen the “Methuselarity,” following which there will actually be a progressive decline in the rate of improvement in our anti-aging technology that is required to prevent a rise in our risk of death from age-related causes as we become chronologically older. Various commentators have observed the similarity of this prediction to that made by Good, Vinge, Kurzweil and others concerning technology in general (and, in particular, computer technology), which they have termed the “singularity.” In this essay I compare and contrast these two concepts.

Wikipedia on actuarial escape velocity.