Manufacturability versus Unmanufacturability

建议在初始结果[1]的基础上进行扩展，并制定一套规则或指导方针，以定义在制造过程中使用的各种技术的基础上，在纳米尺度上实际可制造的和本质上不可制造的之间的界限。制造需要高产量和严格的公差，以预先规定的规格，和目前的纳米科学文献很少解决可制造性的问题。正是由于缺乏这样的规则或指导方针，使得纳米技术期刊无法清楚地区分纳米科学和纳米技术。这些规则的应用将是时变的，因为随着新的制造方法的发展，或者当前的制造方法的发展，有些规则是不可违反的，比如上面提到的规则。这些规则将集中在特性与特性之间的内在可变性消除了满足当前制造标准的任何机会，例如容错架构的6西格玛良率，甚至可能是4西格玛良率。虽然乍一看这是一个消极的项目，但其目的完全是积极的，即描绘出那些研究人员和新设备想法的开发人员可以自信地实现可制造工艺的领域M J Kelly，“内在的自上而下的不可制造性”，纳米技术22 234303 （2011）

It is proposed to expand on initial results [1] and to develop a set of rules or guidelines that define the boundary between what is actually manufactureable at the nanoscale on the basis of the various techniques used in the fabrication process and what is intrinsically unmanufactureable. Manufacture requires high yield to tight tolerance to a pre-ordained specification, and little of the current nanoscience literature addresses the issue of manufacturability. It is the absence of such rules or guidelines that prevent nanotechnology journals to distinguish clearly between nanoscience and nanotechnology. The application of the rules will be time-dependent, in that as new methods of fabrication are developed, or current methods of fabrication evolve: some of the rules, however, such as the one referred to1 are inviolable. The rules will focus on the point at which intrinsic feature-to-feature variability kills off any chance of meeting current standards in manufacturing such as six-sigma yield, or perhaps even four-sigma yield of fault-tolerant architectures. Although this look like a negative project at first sight, the aim is entirely positive, to delineate those areas where researchers and developers of new device ideas can be confident of achieving a manufactureable process.[1] M J Kelly,' Intrinsic top-down unmanufacturability', Nanotechnology 22 234303 (2011)