robotics: from “micro” to “nano”

ISSN 0005�1055, Automatic Documentation and Mathematical Linguistics, 2010, Vol. 44, No. 2, pp. 89–101. © Allerton Press, Inc., 2010.Original Russian Text © A.M. Petrina, 2010, published in Nauchno�Tekhnicheskaya Informatsiya, Seriya 2, 2010, No. 4, pp. 18–29.

89

INTRODUCTION

The prefixes “micro” and “nano” are of Greek ori�gin and mean “small” and “dwarf or dwarfish.”Accordingly, in words containing these Greek orGreek–Latin elements, “micro” and “nano” particlesdesignate a certain fraction or portion of physical val�ues. In our case, the following dimensions are implied:1 Nm = 10–9 m = 10–3 μm = 10 Å (angstrom). In addi�tion, other sizes will be mentioned. An atom measuresabout 0.1 Nm, inorganic molecules about 1 Nm, virussizes range from 10 to 500 Nm, the minimum compo�nent size of modern microchips is about 100 Nm, andthe size of bacteria is ~1000 Nm.

Nanorobotics as a new, separate discipline of sci�ence and technology emerged over the recent twodecades [1–3]. Its great significance is due both to thevariety of its applications, its interdisciplinary charac�ter, and the rapid qualitative and quantitative develop�ment of nanotechnology.

Nanotechnology concerns the ability to operateseparate atoms and molecules on a molecular scaleand to produce structures or devices with fundamentallynew molecular organization with sizes of 1–100 Nm [4].The problem of nanomanipulation is an importantissue of nanotechnology. The ideal compliance withnanotechnological requirements would be a humanoperator’s ability to carry out such tasks as the pickingup, placing, transporting, assembling, stretching, andscratching, etc. inherent in nanoworld technology.Since manipulation in the nanoworld is beyondhuman reach, robots can be used as molecular toolsfor nanomanipulation operations. The use of nanoro�bots will make it possible to automatize molecular�scale production, enabling a human operator to con�trol production process in the world with dimensionsnormal for him.

Components for nanorobotics can be manufac�tured using both top�down and bottom�up approaches.The top�down techniques involve miniaturization andare based on the gradual reduction in the size of the

objects from micro� to nanodimensions. The bottom�up techniques are based on atomic or molecular syn�thesis of increasingly large and complex structures uti�lizing the molecular technology. Therefore, the use ofthe first approach requires technological equipmentbased on devices of the dimensionality of the previousscale and the second approach calls for fundamentallynew equipment. In the course of miniaturization, thetop�down approach is implemented as the modularconstruction of robots from standard series of struc�turally and functionally unified components, such assensing elements, data entry and controlling units,communication elements, actuating (driving) ele�ments, and power units. As the overall dimensionsdrop down to the millimeter scale, system�wide opti�mization results in the interpenetration of these com�ponents, which enables a decrease in their size andimproved performance and reliability (primarilythrough reduction in interelement coupling).

State�of�the�art methods of molecular chemistryor genetic engineering are used to synthesize nano�sized structures, but up to the present day their massproduction seems unattainable, i.e., it appears impos�sible to produce in a single test tube or vial a largenumber of similar nano�sized objects with exactly thesame pre�specified functionality. On the other hand,such “production” by no means contradicts the lawsof nature and is really a part of existing biological sys�tems, which continuously implement large�scale syn�thesis of the most sophisticated “nanomachines”,whose functions and performance are attainedthrough the combination of their respective propertiesand nanosize objects [5].

MINIATURIZATION

Miniaturization originated with microelectronics.Microelectronics in general is a good example of afield where the reduction in the component size is thepredominant means of technological progress. Mod�ern computers emerged as a result of on�going minia�

Robotics: from “Micro” to “Nano”A. M. Petrina

Received on February 8, 2010

Abstract—The current state and prospects of micro� and nanorobotics are described. Miniaturization andmolecular�scale production are considered as two approaches to the development of nanotechnology.

Key words: microrobotics, nanorobotics, nanotechnology, miniaturization, molecular�scale production,developments.

DOI: 10.3103/S0005105510020044

90

AUTOMATIC DOCUMENTATION AND MATHEMATICAL LINGUISTICS Vol. 44 No. 2 2010

PETRINA

turization, which enabled them to solve problems thathad seemed unsolvable only a few years ago. In addi�tion, due to miniaturization computers became muchcheaper and more convenient for their users. Withtime, the miniaturization of production made it possi�ble to create new production processes and facilitatealready existing ones.

The advantages of miniaturization have been mosteffectively manifested in microelectronics, microsys�tem engineering, and robotics technology.

Over the previous several decades, three genera�tions of these devices have passed and new generationsconnected with nanotechnology are successfullyevolving. The features of the prior generations, whichresulted in unsolvable problems, were discarded andfundamentally new approaches were adopted. At thesame time, each new technology generation accumu�lates all the previous scientific and technological find�ings, promoting their further progress. In technology,nothing is wiped out and started from scratch. Thenew generation is not constructed on the ruins of thepast but harmoniously combines revolutionarychanges with evolutionary development. The transi�tion from the old to the new generation is character�ized by comprehensive continuity, and not only in itsdetails. For example, all types of electronics, includingvacuum tubes, semiconductors, and integrated elec�tronics are ultimately used for data processing. In thissense, all the generations of electronics are character�ized by absolute continuity. Changes are taking placein the volume, reliability, noise level, speed, and tech�niques of data processing, but the fact of their process�ing remains the same common purpose of any elec�tronics. The same is true of the purpose of nanoelec�tronics.

Furthermore, all the above�named generationsused the ideas from discoveries made in natural sci�ences (mostly physics) and were based on exact math�ematical theories. This continuity is also preserved inrobotics technology.

Miniaturization in robotics technology implies theproduction and control of structural parameters on thescale of several nanometers. The basic concepts of thenew theory are the notions of top�down constructionconsisting of continuous changes in size, reducing it tomicrometers. The structure of volumetric materialscan be modified by a variety of techniques, e.g., grad�ually changing conditions of thermal processing andmachining, abrasive or chemical polishing of the sur�face, etc. Such techniques also include mechanicalgrinding of a substance to produce microparticles,although such particles can also be produced by chem�ical or physical synthesis based on the bottom�upapproach.

The main requirement for the above�describedtechniques is that they can be used without accurateinformation about microscopic structure (micro� ornanometers). Accurate measurements, however, are

required in the manufacturing of a large number ofidentical microstructures. Structural unity in nano�technology is currently based on lithographic tech�niques [6]. These technologies are mostly based onoptical methods that use masking, which makes it pos�sible to produce the required components in a light�sensitive layer of a photoresistor (a polymeric materialthat changes its properties when exposed to light).This enables the production of the necessary structuresby combining suitable lighting regimes and using well�known methods of etching, diffusion, and implanta�tion.

Silicon is the standard material for microelectronicand micromechanical components, and for some spe�cial elements of a microcircuit various doping materi�als can be used, as well as (for especially sophisticatedsystems) semiconductor bonds, polymers, organicmaterials, etc. The methods for structuring and minia�turization for samples usually vary for every particularcase.

The top�down type of technology implicitly impliesthat reduction in the size of structures does not affecttheir basic properties or functioning principles. It isconsidered that the properties of a substance are notchanged under miniaturization, so that the problem isultimately reduced to decreasing the sizes of previ�ously designed devices.

The main problem of nanotechnology is actually amuch more complicated phenomenon because (at acertain development stage) changes in the scale of thestudied or used objects lead not only to drastic changesin the manufacturing environment but may even callfor the revision of the laws of nature as we understandthem. If the employed miniaturization strategy doesnot contradict clear and well�known laws of nature,the existing design principles can be maintained. Incomponent production for microrobotics this simplyimplies that new and even smaller devices of the sametype can be produced (but with improved characteris�tics), e.g., based on the perfection of lithographictechniques and standard materials on the basis of thepreviously adopted functioning principles. At thesame time, the problem is not as simple as this, evenfor lithography, because its potential (the size of theproduced structural elements) is limited by the wave�length of the applied light, i.e., the transition frommicro� to nanosizes requires changing from ultravioletradiation to the far�ultraviolet region, for which thereare as yet no standard light sources and proper materi�als. In this case, the observation of the theoreticalprinciples of design must be combined with solvingchallenging technological problems connected withthe physics of the processes.

Even when changes in the scale of production pro�cesses appear to be technically implementable andeconomically feasible, it should be borne in mind thatevery “top�down” transition can involve contradic�tions of well�known laws of physics that may render


ROBOTICS: FROM “MICRO” TO “NANO” 91

the very statement of a technological problem mean�ingless if the pattern of physical phenomena changesat the new scale. For example, an ordinary moderntransistor consists of 1010 to 1012 atoms, while a nan�otransistor will only consist of 1000 (103) atoms, sothat the “individual features” of atoms can be mani�fested. Such changes in scale can result in the transis�tor failing to comply with the designer’s initial criteria,e.g., due to changes in silicon crystal properties as aresult of the reduction in structural dimensions. This isa rough idea that can account for numerous new phe�nomena in nanotechnology.

The following aspects of miniaturization are distin�guished, which affect the functional capacity of nano�structures:

• In nanotechnology, the properties of the materialon the surface of the structure become especially sig�nificant because in some cases the entire object can betreated as a special “surface”. In such cases, the prop�erties of the surface regions of the material begin todiffer drastically from the physico–chemical charac�teristics inside the material.

• Some parameters of a certain material or compo�nent can be reduced to such an extent that their func�tional capacity will not be implementable within theproposed functioning principle.

• The extent of quantum pattern manifestations onnew scales can lead to the “disappearance” of the veryphenomena on which the designed functionality of theprojected devices or materials was based.

The above�mentioned limits of size reduction arenot critical for mathematical calculations or for esti�mates of physical and chemical characteristics inmodels of the bottom�up type. In many cases, the exactmethod for the production of a particular nanostruc�ture is not very important but the reduction in scale (inour case, miniaturization) is of great significance.Scale changes always call for modifications in para�digms with respect to the principles of the functioningand application of particular structures. In roboticstechnology, such an approach becomes the source ofthe advanced features of miniaturization.

Therefore, a reduction in the size of items is alwaysconnected with technological problems and physicallaws of nature, because on some dimensional scale weinevitably have to deal with quantum�mechanicaleffects, which necessitate the modification ofapproaches to the development associated with theprinciples of functioning and criteria for the design ofthe devices themselves. The targeted use of new prop�erties due to the small size of a structure is one of thebasic principles of nanotechnology observed by nano�robotics.

CONNECTION BETWEEN NANOROBOTICS AND NANOELECTRONICS

The development of nanorobotics is closely con�nected with the evolution of nanoelectronics, becausethe main components of robots, such as control sys�tems, sensor systems, computers, etc., are electronicproducts. The skyrocketing technical development ofmicroelectronics is essentially due to positive feed�back: electronics are used to help to develop electron�ics devices and new types of computers are developedby means of computers. This chain of relations (withpositive feedback) integrates new approaches con�nected with nanorobotics. It seems obvious that anyspecifically projected developments must be based onalready existing production strategies and principles offunctioning and on a basis that enables further reduc�tion in topological dimensions. Some components ofmodern electronic devices already have nanosizecomponents. In this situation, further improvement incomponent accuracy does not require fundamentalchanges in the operating principles of these elementsand is actually reduced to very or extremely complextechnical problems (e.g., development of suitablelithographic techniques, etc.). In this sense the con�tinuous general development of microelectronicsleads to its gradual transformation to nanoelectronics,and microrobotics is similarly evolving into nanoro�botics.

Paradigm change in specific fields and directions is,nevertheless, inevitable since nanotechnologies some�times offer immense advantages over the classicapproaches in microelectronics and in some particularspheres these advantages are absolutely evident. Forexample, the advantages of carbon nanotubes both inelectronics and in robotics technology are obvious [7,8]. Another example is connected with the productionof storage circuits (chips) with ferromagnetic storagecells. Such devices are energy independent, i.e., theykeep information when the power is switched off andcan be started up instantaneously. Moreover, they stayenergy�independent, even under further size reduc�tion. The lower attained limit of their length could beabout 25 Nm, which enables further miniaturization.Such devices may become an important component inthe development of so�called reconfigurable logic cellsthat can be used in nanorobotics.

A serious problem in microelectronics is the devel�opment of the software that is to become the basis formodeling the general�purpose applied software pack�ages for robots and for the integration of peripheralunits in robotic systems. The Microsoft corporationhas set up a research team to work out a basic set ofsoftware and to solve the problems of parallel process�ing of sensor information, which can largely expandthe applications of robots [9].

The technology of program decentralization beingdeveloped will make it possible to create a totally newclass of robots that function like mobile wireless

92


PETRINA

devices. An additional method to simplify program�ming is the development of virtual media that enablethe modeling and observation of nanorobot behaviorduring testing [10].

One of the most difficult problems of nanoroboticsis the simultaneous processing of all the data from sen�sor devices and the issue of the respective commandsto the executive elements, i.e., the problem of “paral�lelism” [11]. Robots execute traditional programs thatare a complex cycle that starts from sensor data read�ing (recognition) and processing followed by com�mands instructing the machine to perform a certain setof operations. The drawback of this control method isits long response time. It seems more promising tochange over to parallel data processing by means ofquantum computers, homogeneous multiprocessorcomputing systems, and neural�network structuresthat attempt to directly reproduce the structure of liv�ing organisms.

In common digital computers, information is rep�resented as a binary sequence of the symbols “0” and“1”. An information bit corresponds to the choice ofone of these digits. The sequence of N digital bitsmakes it possible to represent any number in the rangefrom 0 to 2N–1. Quantum calculations operate quan�tum bits, which are usually called qubits. A qubit is astate wave function of a quantum�mechanical two�level system (e.g., states of electron spin of +/– 1/2).One qubit can only transmit one bit of information. Atthe same time, a system of N two�level quantum ele�ments can be in a superposition of 2N states. In quan�tum computers, data are transmitted, stored, and pro�cessed as a wave function of N qubits. While asequence of N digital bits can specify one of 2N digits,the sequence of N qubits specifies all those 2N numberssimultaneously.

Therefore, quantum computers can be used tosolve more complex problems than those soluble byordinary computers. The volume and speed of opera�tions with data is increased many times, not only dueto the reduced time of a single operation but alsoowing to the parallelization of the computation: theparallel processing of all the amplitudes of 2N states isperformed at once, whereas for a classic computersuch an operation would take 2N steps. For example, aquantum computer with a register of 30 qubits candescribe a system of 230 ≈ 1010 elements, while an ordi�nary computer will not be able to calculate the futureof a system of 30 electrons in a potential well (a layer ofa crystal with a thickness comparable with the de Bro�glie wavelength) if the initial state and the interparticleforce are given. Such problems can become significantdue to the potential necessity of modeling electronprocesses in nanoelectronic devices, including molec�ular circuits. So far, quantum computers are onlyhypothetical. Quantum algorithms have been workedout for some simple problems and computers havebeen designed with small registers of several qubits.

The central role in nanorobotics in the study ofindividual nanostructures is played by scanning tun�neling microscopes. These are a nanorobot’s “eyes”and “fingers” [12]. In particular, a scanning tunnelingmicroscope based on the tunnel effect (invented in1981) produces an image of metal and semiconductorsurfaces with atomic resolution.

The invention of the tunneling microscope enabledthe visual display of separate molecules and atoms onthe screen of a computer monitor [13]. A remarkablefeature of the tunneling microscope is that it enables aresearcher not only to see an atom but also to “touch”it and even, by pressing an infinitesimal conductingtip, to shift it to a different place. The conducting tipof the tunneling microscope is so thin that it can toucha single atom. This means that by successively touch�ing and shifting atoms one by one with the conductingtip, structures can be obtained after some time and insome steps that are similar to natural structures. Inother words, this conducting tip becomes a continua�tion of a human finger. Thus, the tunneling micro�scope makes it possible to move separate atoms, trans�fer them to pre�specified points, stack atoms and mol�ecules one by one, and to synthesize and decomposeseparate molecules. Therefore, the tunneling micro�scope has introduced drastic changes in human rela�tions with substance and matter. This microscopeturns into a working instrument, a manual labor toolthat enables a totally new technological approach,which uses atoms as bricks and construction of newstructures up to creating a tiny machine or robot,which, in spite of its infinitesimal size, will be able tooperate like mechanisms of ordinary size.

Scanning atomic�force microscopes (which wereworked out in 1986) also provide a sample surfaceimage with atomic resolution. These images are usedto study the morphology of surfaces, the distributionof their physical properties, the investigation of surfaceprocesses, and nanoassembly [14–20].

MOLECULAR�SCALE PRODUCTION

The properties of materials or components dependon the set of atoms in the considered or designedmaterials. For example, a crystal is made of atoms andmolecules of a certain type characterized by a certaingeometric position, which determines the density andposition of defects or impurity atoms. In nanostruc�tures, functionality is determined by the relationshipbetween size and properties, so that the targeted devel�opment of new materials (whose properties are deter�mined by the interactions of atoms) can result in mate�rials with fundamentally new functional capabilities.

Let us now consider a nanomaterial: its repeatedmotif is one molecule that can be complex, but themost important issue is that it confers some necessarycharacteristic (dimensional stability, the ability tostore information, etc.). This property, however, is



only manifested when millions of such similar mole�cules are brought together. This functionality is alsoshown when the elementary bricks of a material arenot composed of molecules but are nanoparticles sev�eral nanometers in diameter making up a group ofthousands of atoms. The intentional structuring of asubstance aimed at creating a material with desiredproperties has been used since ancient times. A well�known example is alloying nanoparticles of copper inglass to make it reddish. Similar nanoparticles serve aspigments in paint and ink [4].

Even simple examples of crystalline solid structuresclearly demonstrate how dramatically the propertiesof a material can vary when the atomic or molecularorder in the system is changed. It is a matter of com�mon knowledge that there are several absolutely dif�ferent modifications of carbon’s solid phase (from dia�mond to graphite). In a diamond, each carbon atom isconnected to the four nearest carbon atoms by cova�lent bonds resulting in a structure resembling that ofgermanium and silicon (diamond formally is classifiedas a semiconductor but has a wide forbidden band,making it often fall under the class category of insula�tors). The diamond structure is very hard, unlikegraphite, which has a layered structure of carbonatoms where every atom in the layer is only connectedwith three neighbors so that the substance as a wholeassumes an electrical conductivity that is typical ofmetals, as well as being of exceptional mechanicalsoftness.

In both cases, we deal with systems exclusivelymade of carbon atoms, so that great differences in thephysical properties of the two materials arise and canbe attributed only to the different ordering of atoms incrystal lattices. This ordering and type of lattice gener�ally results from differences in the forces actingbetween the atoms and molecules and leading to theformation of specific crystal systems. The exampleabove is well�known but its significance increasedwhen it was discovered that there was another modifi�cation of carbon in the form of a nanotube. The crystallattice of a nanotube also consists exclusively of carbonatoms connected in hexagons. An ideal nanotube is agraphite plane rolled into a “seamless” cylinder. Nan�otube diameter can vary from 0.5 Nm to about100 Nm; the length can be in a range from several doz�ens of nanometers to millimeters. Carbon nanotubeshave unusual electric, magnetic, and electronic prop�erties, which can be technologically modified.

Since the time of the discovery of nanotubes (1991)attention has been attracted by their unusual proper�ties, such as their nanosize, a large specific surfacearea, high electric conductivity, chemical stability, andan ability to append metal atoms and radicals, whichenables the targeted modification of nanotube charac�teristics.

The applicability of nanotubes seems very wide,including electrochemical power sources and TV

screens, gearwheels in nanomechanisms and ultrasen�sitive chemical sensors, artificial muscles and logiccells in processors, radiation screens, and nanoelectriccircuits, etc. Some applications have already beenused, such as nanotube�based TV displays and variouscomposite materials with special properties.

Carbon nanotubes open a new promising directionof future electronics and nanorobotics due to theirelectronic properties. The possibility of creating nan�otube�based diodes, field�effect transistors, and logiccircuits has already been demonstrated. Nanotubescan also be characterized by metallic conductivity andact as supply leads. IBM researchers have shown thatnanotube transistors can be grown in bulk and aredeveloping the integration of semiconductors andmetal nanotubes on a common substrate.

Due to the unique properties of carbon nanotubesit is basically possible to create an element base forelectronics based on the application of nanotubes. Ashas already been noted, the interest in carbon�basednanoelectronics, as well as numerous investigationsand developments in this field, are connected with thelooming limit of miniaturization of silicon�basedmicrochips. Electronic circuitry on nanotubes is a fur�ther stage of miniaturization that is based on the bot�tom�up approach. Depending on their structures, bothsemiconductor and metal nanotubes exist. In semi�conductor nanotubes the conductivity type can bechanged by means of doping. The current in the con�ductivity channel along a nanotube can be used tocontrol the transverse field, i.e., on individual nano�tubes, analogues of n� and p� field effect transistorscan be created, which can serve as the basis of modernmicroelectronic circuits. On individual nanotubes p–n transitions can be formed. There are techniques forproducing semiconductor–semiconductor transitions(bonding of nanotubes with different diameters),metal–semiconductor transitions (bending of nano�tubes, their partial filling with metal, or chemicalmodification of their fragments). Straightening prop�erties (unilateral conductivity) are characteristic of T�and Y� shaped tubes. Metal nanotubes have high elec�tric conductivity, they pass current without significantheating, and can be used as conducting joints.

As has been shown in [21–24], structures made ofnanotubes can be constructed by means of the mea�surement and control of molecular properties and sur�face tension forces. The properties of a multilayer nan�otube can be changed by regulating the number of lay�ers and their geometry. The geometry is modified bychanging tube length by mechanical drawing of its lay�ers. When separate layers are drawn, the nanotubelength is increased and its diameter is reduced. A mul�tilayered carbon tube must be elongated and shaped insuch a way as to produce layered or pointed structures.Due to its elasticity, a nanotube must bend to form aloop structure and the strained pointed ends of a nan�

94


PETRINA

otube must be fixed, e.g., by means of an electronbeam.

The basic elements of the main nanotube structuresare junctions. Various junctions of nanotubes of differ�ent diameters and such characteristics as chirality(mutual orientation of the hexagonal grid and nano�tube axis) make it possible to construct complex unitsfrom separate elements. The building blocks thus fab�ricated can be successfully applied to future assemblyto produce complex functional structures of nanoro�bots and units of electronic devices.

It is certain that the transition to nanotube�basedelectronics and robotics will not be rapid; this is only agroundbreaking technology and numerous problemsare yet to be solved. It appears that the first hybridstructures will be produced in parallel with traditionalstructures. At present, a method has been developedfor separating semiconductor and metal nanotubes,techniques have been worked out for obtaining electri�cal contacts to nanotubes, and resistance has beenstudied of nanotubes contacts with various metals.Methods have been developed for producing T� and Y�shaped nanotubes and peapod structures, as well astechniques for filling nanotubes with metal atoms. Anecessary condition for using nanotubes in robot cir�cuits and designs is the ability to implant nanotubes inpre�specified architectures, thus placing them inrequired positions with a desired orientation.

Let us consider an example of a nanotube�baseddevice in the field of nanomechanical systems [4].According to theoretical evaluation, benzol moleculescan be bonded with the surface of a carbon nanotube,and nanotubes with bonded benzol molecules can beused in molecular gearing. Benzol molecules can serveas teeth in the pinions in domes of carbon nanotubes.The pinion teeth transfer driving torque from a drivepinion to a follower gear. The transfer transforms therotational motion of the pinion to the translationalmotion of the shaft. The driving pinion is set intomotion by a laser engine. This engine operates on theprinciple that two free charges, +q and –q, are appliedto the opposite ends of a nanotube’s diameter, e.g., bymeans of suitable functional groups. Such a nanotubehas a natural oscillation frequency about its axis in theplane perpendicular to the axis. When the oscillationfrequency of the laser field approximately equals thepinion’s natural oscillation frequency and the phaseshift is properly selected it results in unidirectionalrotation of the pinion. Such a transmission occurs in avacuum with frequencies up to ~100 GHz.

Calculations show that in principle it is possible tocreate such devices as a “shaft with a clutch” or a“nanopiston”. In the first case, the internal tube of atwo�layer nanotube rotates inside the external nano�tube practically without friction. In the second case agroup of internal tubes of a multilayer nanotube tipsback and forth inside external tubes with very low fric�tion, which is required for the mechanical parts of

nanomechanisms. If the “piston” is drawn out andreleased, it will be drawn inside under the action ofVan der Waals forces, which results in the “piston’s”natural oscillations with a frequency of ~109 Hz (thespeed of modern processors).

Nanopistons, shafts, bearings, and toothed gear�ings are important components of the future nanome�chanical systems of nanorobots.

The above�presented description of nanomechani�cal systems shows the strong dependence of molecularand atomic materials on atomic structure, whichimmediately implies the possibility of regulatingnanomaterial characteristics by targeted ordering ofthe constituent atoms of a structure. This is the funda�mental idea of the bottom�up mathematical models.

Producing nanostructures from a large number ofatoms and molecules opens, naturally, numerous newpossibilities for combining an atom’s position in three�dimensional space. Certainly, these possibilities arenot arbitrary and are determined by physical, andchemical laws based on interatomic and intermolecu�lar interactions, so that carbon atoms can form solidbodies of different configurations only under certaintypes of atomic ordering of their structure. The imple�mentation potential of such structures depends on theminimum energy admissible by the conditions of theirgeneration and existence. The relative energy minimathat corresponds to that in statistical physics and ther�modynamics is called a metastable state; it can remainstable for a rather long time.

THE LIMITS OF STRUCTURE MINIATURIZATION IN PRODUCTION

PROCESSES

The crystal grains of a substance seem today to bethe natural miniaturization limit of the structures inproduction processes. It is impossible to imagine atransistor with a size smaller than a single atom, i.e.,less than ~0.1 Nm. Electric charges and currents usedin the devices of modern microelectronics are contin�uous quantities, which creates the basis for the theo�retical and technical rationale of their design and theprinciples of their functioning. It is known, however,that an elementary electric charge exists, whichappears to be a sort of natural lower limit of miniatur�ization for charge flows.

Examples of the lower limits of miniaturization canbe found in nature, which has created and appliedatomic and molecular nanotechnology with func�tional elements and determined the order of magni�tude of the sizes for individual atoms and molecules.There are no universal technologies today for the massproduction of very small components or mechanisms,so no clear assessment of prospects can be made forthe development of molecular nanomechanisms. Sig�nificant progress in miniaturization has been attainedonly in microelectronics and the production of micro�



system devices. The real challenge is not the synthesisof numerous identical small�sized objects but ratherusing them to produce the atomic and molecular com�ponents of more complex structures. It is widelyassumed that the real limits of miniaturization innature have already been imposed by a biological pro�gram (e.g., in the form of engines and other functionalelements) because such programs have been developedand have existed in nature without significant changesfor billions of years.

The production of nanostructures within the frameof technically attainable miniaturization is impossiblewithout applying the mathematical models and tech�nical methods of the top�down type, because there areno devices that could enable the successive reductionin the size of a product without any loss of accuracy. Inaddition, in sophisticated devices there are always cer�tain parts that from the very beginning or ultimatelybecome inaccessible to tooling.

Bottom�up mathematical models and productioncan bring about the self�organization (self�assembly)of individual components and even entire nanostruc�tures. Self�organization under thermodynamic non�equilibrium can result in large assemblies, but it shouldbe noted that the formation of the above�describedcarbon nanotubes and graphite�like structures is ther�mal energy intensive. Certain structures can be pro�duced only if conditions are fulfilled for very complexcatalytic processes, which appears impossible at thepresent level of scientific development. However, thereare examples of nanostructures functioning in naturethat challenge established scientific beliefs, so we willonly have to solve the problem of overcoming sometechnical difficulties of their manufacturing and use.

Therefore, new functional capabilities can be cre�ated by targeted selection of the structural bondsbetween elements and their sizes. According to theirstructure, nanomaterials are subdivided into amor�phous and crystalline types, but in all cases we dealwith transitional forms, whose properties are very dif�ficult to match to the technologies used in production.Since the miniaturization limits existing in the naturecannot be fully accounted for, the bottom�up approachto structure production is employed, because modernscience has not yet developed production or mathe�matical models enabling the top�down production ofthree�dimensional nanostructures.

MOLECULAR FACTORIES

The construction of complex “universal assem�blers,” i.e., mechanical molecular machines that canuse intermolecular or intramolecular adhesion, wasdescribed by E. Drexler [5]. His theoretical develop�ments are presented as virtual molecular assembliesand molecular devices. The first “embodied” mole�cule machine was produced for a physical experimentand described in [13]. It was a molecular wire, i.e., a

chain of molecules fitted with four small molecularlegs and it resembles a mobile robot. The device wasnicknamed Lander by analogy with the Sojournermicrorobot that was sent to Mars by NASA on theMars Pathfinder space probe in 1997. In this experi�ment, a metal surface was used as the test bench, andthe molecule was the experimental apparatus used toposition the molecular wire so that its resistance couldbe measured. This molecular device is sort of a molec�ular ampermeter capable of measuring the intensity ofa current flowing through a molecular wire. It workson the principle that an electric current flows throughthe main branch long enough so that a small rotatingchemical group (the rotor) can be inserted into it.When an electron is transferred from one electrode tothe other through the molecule, it loses some energy,which is dissipated into the molecular wire. Thisenergy is sufficient to heat the chemical rotor andmodify its orientation. If the angle of rotation isknown, the intensity of the electric current flowingthrough the molecule ampermeter can be determined.It should be noted that the molecule itself is less than1.5 Nm long and is one of the most complex moleculardevices known; its chemical synthesis takes severalyears. It is not only molecules that are used as experi�mental devices; experiments can be performed onatoms or groups of atoms arranged on a certain sur�face. An increasing number of atoms can be involved,but no more than is strictly required for the experi�mental apparatus.

For a molecule to become a mechanical device, itmust be equipped with all the details necessary forimplementing the tasks it is intended for. This impliesthat such molecules will be more complicated thanthose described above, because various mechanicalunits will be required (and their fitting and fixation willcall for stronger chemical bonds).

In 2001, the authors of [13] produced a transporta�tion trolley (nicknamed a “molecular wheelbarrow”)1.2 Nm long. It had two molecular front wheels with adiameter of 0.7 Nm, properly attached to an axle andtwo legs at the rear, like the legs of a real wheelbarrow.Finally, there were two little sleeves at the back to actas handles. In the experiment, about 95% of themolecular wheelbarrows were destroyed and theremainder had two or three wheels instead of four andhad other defects. Despite these difficulties, progress isbeing made, in particular, work is under way in con�nection with the rotation of wheels; molecular wheel�barrows are to become more autonomous, and, in par�ticular, experiments are being carried out to providethem with the engines of their own. A special ratchetwill be incorporated into this molecular wheelbarrow.

Today, molecular robots are only an idea. Theirchemical synthesis and the long�distance control ofsuch a synthesis appear to face seemingly insurmount�able obstacles. On the other hand, if the synthesis ofnanorobots is such a difficult task, can it somehow be

96


PETRINA

bypassed? For example, it could be done by specialmachines. These machines would be molecular aswell. Picking atoms one by one (or bonding chemicalcompounds), they will assemble all the necessarymolecular machines. We cannot yet say what thesemolecular assemblers will look like. It is only clear thatwe will need absolutely real assembling plants, evenfactories, for the production of calculating andmechanical molecules, as well as nanorobots.

According to the literature, these molecular assem�blers should look like ultraminiaturized copies of therobots that are employed in modern production. Forexample, such machines would have grabbers, or twee�zers, or telescopic arms for grasping and assemblingmolecules one by one to produce the desired aggre�gates. However, in practice, if a molecular grabbergrasped a molecule, it would never be able to let go ofit because of the chemical reaction required to captureit. What can be done to release this grip? It is impossi�ble to “switch off” a chemical reaction, it is not anelectric current. It is not easy to stop an ongoingchemical reaction. But is there any evidence that theassembler needs a grabber at the end of the telescopicarm of the nanorobot to grasp or move an atom or amolecule?

In [13], the movement of a six�legged molecule bythe conducting tip of a tunneling microscope so that itmanipulated copper atoms that were previouslydeposited on the surface was described. These atomsaccumulated one after the other under the molecule ina small pile and after this it was no longer possible tosort or otherwise manipulate them because they weretrapped by the molecule’s legs. The experimentercould release the trapped atoms by using the tip of themicroscope to remove the molecule that assembledthem.

Other researchers have experimented with the useof an STM as an assembler. They tried to use it to syn�thesize a molecule atom by atom or molecular frag�ment by molecular fragment. It proved, however, to beextremely difficult to force two molecules to reactchemically using the tip of the microscope. Moleculeshave to be manipulated precisely to achieve a molecu�lar orientation that will allow a chemical reaction tooccur, which depends on the orientation of both mol�ecules. The problem can be solved by raising the tem�perature, because heat causes a molecule to move andadopt multiple random orientations and thereforesome of them are certain to enter the reactions theresearchers need.

Thus, the innovative aspect consists in the targeteddevelopment of original methods aimed at obtainingnew operations based primarily on novel combinationsof materials and techniques (e.g., the combination ofmicroelectronic and biochemical technologies). Inthe field of nanocomponent production the impor�tance of combining strategies should be emphasized,

i.e., looking for matching technologies and their“mixture” or combination.

In the future new approaches can be expected inmicro� and nanoelectronic systems, such as micro�electromechanical systems, or MEMS, and nanoelec�tromechanical systems (NEMS), which includemechanical elements (gauges, executive elements,etc.). These devices receive some signal (not electric)or send an electric command to mechanical elements.At present MEMS form a hierarchy of the tiniestmechanisms on the micron scale, such as pumps,valves, springs, clamps, gearing, which are used inrobots [25–27]. The great advantages of the MEMSare evident. They are used because of lithography,which is an area of microelectronics that is supportedby research laboratories with resources for implement�ing its recent developments. The production tech�niques adopted by microelectronics, which broughtabout the MEMS, are currently also employed in biol�ogy for biochemical analysis. Today, microrobots arebeing developed that will be able to detect the genomicdefects causing hereditary diseases and to identifyviruses. It seems advantageous to combine all thesetests in a single molecule or group of molecules inorder to obtain all the necessary data about a chain ofatoms (a drop of blood or water). It is also projected toset up small but real laboratories capable of testing tinyparticles. e.g., drops of blood. This involves the neces�sity of producing infinitesimal separators, chemicalreactors, and sensors and providing these with electriccircuits based on conductors much thinner than a hair.

In the NEMS field, bottom�up methods will mostprobably play a crucial role because they make themass production of many key components of nanoro�botics (e.g., carbon tubes, polymeric materials, etc.)possible; these can be combined with other compo�nents to create integrated and sophisticated structures.Interestingly, the combination of the macroscopicenvironment of these nanodevices may be imple�mented using the opposite, i.e., the top�downapproach. The critical issue in setting up the industrialproduction of nanostructures and nanomaterials islikely to be the development of an optimum strategyfor synthesis based on the appropriate combination oftop�down and bottom�up technological processes.

ROBOTICS, NANOBIOTECHNOLOGY,AND MEDICINE

The most fundamental and long�term objective forthe development of micro� and nanorobotics is theapplication of biological principles and strategies tothe production of micro� and nanorobots. In thecourse of their evolution, biological objects attainedremarkable functional efficiency and optimality,which can become the basis of a new scientific direc�tion, viz., nanobiorobotics.



Today, the smallest living bacteria that can bemanipulated by microrobots that have a size of lessthan 200 Nm. For comparison, the average size of ahuman cell is about 20000 Nm. Viruses are evensmaller (200–300 Nm) but they are not considered tobe living organisms because they cannot live or repro�duce themselves independently.

By way of example, consider the self�assembly(self�organization) of the tobacco mosaic virus. In thisparticular case we deal with the biological synthesis ofa nanoparticle that is shaped like a complex coil. Thevirus is generated in a complex biochemical environ�ment and in highly unbalanced thermodynamic con�ditions but the probability of synthesis errors is verylow, perhaps because the generation process includessome correction mechanisms and the “self�treat�ment” of the structures. The consumption of materialsin such a process is optimally small and the productionprocess as a whole has maximum efficiency. Generallyspeaking, the assembly process is based on the use ofhierarchically differentiated and highly specific inter�molecular interactions. It appears evident that theanalogous technological process for the production ofseparate functional components or whole nanosys�tems at “molecular factories” operating on the basis ofthis principle could become a totally new, universal,and very important production principle.

Another important biological approach is the use ofbiological components for the optimization of techno�logical processes and systems. Such components exist,for example, in functional molecules such as proteins oreven in larger elements called biological motors. Theproblem is that any application of such biocomponentswill require their isolation from the natural biologicalenvironment and transfer to a technical system.

Researchers are at present developing microscopiclinear and rotary engines, drive gears, and switchersoperating on the basis of biological principles. Suchdevices are very important for the regulation of micro�scopic flows of liquids, which is of a special signifi�cance for the production of nanosize pumps, gateunits, and sensory devices (microsensors) for medicalrobots. Especially significant biological materials areused in the development and mass�scale implementa�tion of new types of biosensors for robot�assisted diag�nostics in medicine.

The effective functioning of individual biologicalstructures is very important and interesting, to saynothing of the fact that the principles of their func�tioning may provide a basis for designing nanorobots.However, for logical structures (or at least their ana�logues) to be practically used in science and technol�ogy it is necessary to solve fundamental problems,without which the development of nanotechnologywould be utterly meaningless. Such problems include,among others, finding the ultimate limits of technicalminiaturization, developing techniques for the pro�duction of sufficient quantities of standardized nano�

size “parts”, methods for connecting those “parts”with the external macroscopic devices, and methodsfor the practical application of such structures.

The questions about matter manipulation and thecreation of nanorobots via synthesis based on livingand nonliving organisms inevitably give rise to theproblems of life and vice versa. While the 20th centurywas a time for constructing structures from atoms andtheir manipulation, the 21st century is likely to be atime for creating structures from living and deadorganisms. The so�called “synthetic” biology today islikely to produce a living structure “in vitro”. Assum�ing that life is reduced to the arrangement of complexmolecules, which (when properly arranged) form bio�logical systems, the proponents of synthetic biology donot doubt the feasibility of the creation of a living sub�stance. Most scientists believe that life originated as aresult of a certain chemical evolution. On gaining fur�ther and deeper understanding of the chemical pro�cesses taking place inside the cell, researchers arebecoming increasingly convinced that animate andinanimate nature obey the same laws.

The theory of spontaneous generation of life orvitalism, which was criticized by Pasteur, was ratherpopular in various forms before the middle of the 19thcentury. This theory is associated with some life�gen�erating faith or force that is different from the forcesacting on physical and chemical phenomena. There isa hypothesis that life emerges in the process of thetransition of an inert substance having certain proper�ties to living matter. Let us imagine that a molecule isbecoming increasingly complex and its organization iscontinuously improving. The forces that emergebetween particles with new properties in this size rangecan be called “sympathetic attraction”. As soon asthese sympathetic forces arise between two particleswe can say that the two particles “fall in love” witheach other. Two particles rush to each other, whateverthe distance between them may be, and overcome bar�riers of billions of particles. When they unite a moreorganized structure emerges, which can bring aboutthe transition from inanimate cell to living matter.

So far, mechanisms inside the cell have been stud�ied, such as the information circulation in the cell, thefunctioning of intracellular regulators, the interac�tions between genes and proteins, and cellular com�munication with “neighbors” and the ambientmedium etc., so that reproduction of these mecha�nisms can be achieved later. The investigation of newfunctions is predicted and the “programming” of cellsto perform new tasks that were never performed previ�ously.

In medicine, microrobots have been developedwith ultraminiaturized electromotors with high�speedrotors that spin with an energy consumption of mil�lionths of a watt, which can move along human bloodvessels and inside bodily organs. Even now, surgicalrobots can remove thrombs from vessels, gallstones,

98


PETRINA

pancreatic, renal, and liver calculi, and treat internalinjuries without major surgery. Microrobots can trans�port medicines to human organs in order to improvetheir physiological activities. The replacement of cut�ting instrument in microrobots by laser systems hasenabled the performance of the most difficult andcomplex surgical operations. In the 21st century fur�ther improvement of medical microrobots can beexpected, which will completely change the state ofmodern surgery.

Nanorobots 10–9 m in size are another medicalinvention. The combination of biology and microelec�tronics may allow the production of radio identifiersthat will stand guard in the body, monitoring the mainprocess taking place in it. After introduction into thebody they will monitor blood composition, the level offree radicals in cells, and the secretion of hormones bythe pituitary gland. In the brain, they will be able torecord signals that are transmitted by neurons in orderto decode the flow of information along nerves, i.e., toread human thoughts. Therefore, many billions ofscanners called nanorobots can be directed inside thebrain to study it from the inside. Such radio identifiers,however, are not likely to emerge in the nearest future,since today we can only maintain communication withsystems at the micrometer scale. Some specialistsbelieve that it is hardly feasible to miniaturize theseelectronic devices down to their limit because whilethe micrometric scale seems justified, this is hardly thecase for the nanometric size. They are correct, becausethings that are possible at the first level are unattain�able on the second one.

Microrobots are being designed that will destroymalignant bacteria, viruses, and senescent cells as awhole or absorb them gradually following introduc�tion into the vascular system. Among other things,they will be equipped with an ultrasensitive “rapid bal�ance” consisting of carbon nanotubes, which will beable to weigh viruses. The motion of nanorobots alongblood vessels can be controlled by nanocomputerswith a lightning�fast rate of response. As mentionedabove, biological analogues of nanorobots operate inliving organisms. Some organisms are mixed in theblood vessels by means of helical filaments, which arerotated by protein “spinners”. Bacteriophages pene�trate pathogenic bacteria and completely destroythem. The energy source for nanorobots and nano�computers will be blood glucose and oxygen. Theoperation of the nanorobots can be controlled by spe�cialists, as miniature cameras will transmit an image toan external display and infrared sensors will record theposition of every nanorobot introduced into the body.

The problems of using micro� and nanorobotsinside the human body have been extensively discussedin the scientific community and by the general public.

CONCLUSIONS

There are three major development directions ofmodern robotics, i.e., macro�, micro�, and nanoro�botics. Each of these technological generations differin their dimensionality and respective technologicalinnovation. Macroscale robots designed on the basis ofstate�of�the�art scientific and technological develop�ments are currently employed in almost all spheres ofhuman activities. There are about a million robots ofvarious types. These robots can have a simple or ahighly sophisticated design and their relative dimen�sions can differ by a millionfold.

The development of micro� and nanorobotics islargely based on the methods, materials, and strategiesof nanotechnologies, including microelectronics,materials science, and bionanotechnology. The com�ponents for micro� and nanorobotics can be producedboth by top�down and bottom�up techniques. Themethods of the top�down� type involve miniaturizationand their main principle is a gradual reduction in sizefrom the micro� to the nanoscale. The bottom�up tech�nique is based on the atomic or molecular synthesis ofincreasingly large and complex structures, which rep�resents molecular technology. At the same time, theimplementation of the first principle requires techno�logical equipment based on the technology of the pre�vious dimensionality, and the implementation of thesecond principle calls for fundamentally new equip�ment. In the course of miniaturization, the top�downapproach is implemented in the form of modulardesign of robots using standard�size series of construc�tionally and functionally unified components, such assensor, information, control, communication, execu�tive (driving), and power�supply units.

In the field of nanocomponent production theimportance of combining strategies should be empha�sized, i.e., looking for matching technologies and theirmixture or combination.

In the future new approaches can be expected inmicro� and nanoelectronic systems, such as micro�electromechanical systems, or MEMS, and nanoelec�tromechanical systems (NEMS), which includemechanical elements (gauges, executive elements, etc,of the electronics proper) and which can have greatindustrial importance. At present MEMS form a hier�archy of the tiniest mechanisms at the micron scale,such as pumps, valves, springs, clamps, and gearing,with micrometer�scale pinions. The production tech�niques adopted by microelectronics that made MEMSpossible are employed in biology for biochemical anal�ysis.

In the NEMS field, bottom�up methods will mostprobably play a crucial role, because they make themass production of many key components of nanoro�botics (e.g., carbon tubes, polymeric materials, etc.)possible; these can be combined with other compo�nents to create integrated and sophisticated structures.Interestingly, the “combination” of the macroscopic



environment of these nanodevices will be imple�mented using the opposite, i.e., top�down approach.The critical issue in setting up the commercial produc�tion of nanostructures and nanomaterials is likely to bethe development of the optimum strategy for synthesisbased on the appropriate combination of top�down andbottom�up technological processes.

State�of�the�art methods of molecular chemistryor genetic engineering are used to synthesize nano�sized structures but their mass production seems unat�tainable, i.e., it appears to be impossible to produce alarge number of similar nano�sized objects withexactly the same pre�specified functionality in a singletest tube or vial. Such “production”, however, by nomeans contradicts the laws of nature and is really apart of existing biologic systems that continuouslyimplement large�scale synthesis of the most sophisti�cated “nanomachines”, whose functionality and per�formance are attained through the combination oftheir respective properties and nanosize objects.

In considering the possibilities for the creation ofmicro� and nanorobots one should make a clear dis�tinction between the modern developmental stage ofrobotics and short�, mid�, and long�term forecasts.The crucial aspect in setting up production is the avail�ability of techniques that make it possible to producecomponents or materials and ensure the requiredaccuracy of reproduction within the pre�specifiedrange of parameters.

The production of individual nanosize objects andstructures is mostly based on the manufacturing of pla�nar elements of microelectronics and is confined tothe combination of well�known methods with unusualmaterials or the production of surfaces with new func�tional features. For example, the results obtained fromthe investigations of physical and geometrical modelsof intermolecular contacts between surfaces and cohe�sive forces observed in living nature are used to createrobots that climb vertical surfaces. These results havemade it possible to design robots of a new type thatclimb vertical planes; these seem to be highly commer�cially promising for numerous applications. Thisexample clearly shows that the development andimplementation of robotics can and must be based noton fantastic discoveries but on significant improve�ments and combinations of techniques, some of whichare quite common.

A serious problem in microelectronics is the devel�opment of software that will become the basis formodeling general�purpose applied software packagesfor robots and for the integration of peripheral units inrobotic systems.

The technology of program decentralization that isbeing developed will make it possible to create a totallynew class of robots that function like mobile wirelessdevices. An additional way to simplify the program�ming is the development of virtual media that can

enable the modeling and observation of nanorobotbehavior during testing.

One of the most difficult problems of nanoroboticsis the simultaneous processing of all the data from sen�sor devices and the issuing of commands to executiveelements, i.e., the problem of “parallelism.” Robotsexecute traditional programs that are a complex cyclestarting from reading sensor data (recognition) andprocessing followed by commands instructing amachine to perform a certain set of operations. Thedrawback of this control method is its long responsetime. It seems more promising to change over to par�allel data processing by means of quantum computers,homogeneous multiprocessor computing systems, andneural�network structures that attempt to directlyreproduce the structures of living organisms. Thus far,quantum computers are only hypothetical.

Scanning tunneling microscopes play a central rolein nanorobotics for studying individual nanostruc�tures. Those are a nanorobot’s “eyes” and “fingers”.In particular, the scanning tunneling microscope,which is based on the tunnel effect (which was discov�ered in 1981), produces images of metal and semicon�ductor surfaces with atomic resolution.

The tunneling microscope has introduced signifi�cant changes in human interactions with substancesand matter. It has become a working instrument, amanual tool that enables a totally new technologicalapproach using atoms as bricks and constructing newstructures up to creating tiny machines or robots,which, in spite of their infinitesimal size, will be able tooperate like mechanisms of the usual size.

The scanning atomic�force microscope (inventedin 1986) also provides a sample surface image withatomic resolution. It is used to study the morphologyof surfaces, the distribution of their physical proper�ties, and the investigation of surface processes, (e.g.,etching). On its basis, research and development areperformed with ultracompact data recording andsupersensitive sensors.

The general approach to bionanotechnologyincludes a large variety of biological methods andstrategies that have a great potential for the productionof technological nanosystems. The use of biologicalcomponents in the production of robots is an impor�tant direction in bionanotechnology. Functionalhybrid structures and various biomaterials, which playan important part in the creation and implementationof sensors for medical robotics, are of special interest.The careful study of biological principles, systems, anddevelopment mechanisms, especially those of self�organization and “self�maintenance” of nanorobots,are of great significance for the general developmentstrategy.

In the future, biological molecules or componentscan be directly applied, not only to nanorobotics, butalso to other technical structures. The effective func�tioning of individual logical structures is very impor�

100


PETRINA

tant and interesting, to say nothing of the fact that theprinciples of their functioning can provide the basis fordesigning nanorobots. However, for logical structures(or at least their analogues) to be practically used inscience and technology it will be necessary to solvefundamental problems, without which the develop�ment of nanotechnology would be utterly meaning�less. Such problems include, among others, findingthe ultimate limits of technical miniaturization; devel�oping techniques for the production of sufficientquantities of standardized nanosize “parts”, develop�ing methods for connecting those “parts” with exter�nal macroscopic devices, and methods for the practi�cal application of such structures.

It is expected that the greatest number of micro�and nanorobots will be used in medicine. Today,microrobots are being developed that will be able todetect genomic defects that cause hereditary diseasesand to identify viruses. It seems advantageous to com�bine all these tests in a single molecule or group ofmolecules in order to obtain all the necessary dataabout a chain of atoms (a drop of blood or water). Set�ting up small but real laboratories capable of testingtiny particles. e.g., drops of blood is also proposed.This involves the production of infinitesimal separa�tors, chemical reactors, and sensors; these must beprovided with suitable electric circuits. The operationof nanorobots introduced into the human body mustbe controlled by specialists. The problems of usingmicro� and nanorobots inside the human body havebeen extensively discussed in the scientific communityand by the general public.

REFERENCES

1. Abbott, J.J., Nagy, Z., Beyeler, F., and Nelson, B.J.,Robotics in the Small. Part. 1. Microrobotics, IEEERobotics & Automation Magazine, 2007, vol. 14, no. 2,pp. 92–103.

2. Menciassi, A., Eisinberg, A., Izzo, I., and Dario, P.,From “Macro” to “Micro” manipulation: Models andExperiments, IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatron�ics, 2004, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 311–320.

3. Lopota, V.A. and Yurevich, Ye.I., Extreme Roboticsand Mechatronics. Development Principles and Pros�pects, Mekhatronika, Avtomatizatsiya, upravleniye,2007, no. 4, pp. 37–42.

4. Hartmann, U., Faszination Nanotechnologie, München,Heidelberg: Elsevier/Spektrum Verlag, 2006.

5. Drexler, E., Engines of Creation, New York: AnchorBooks, 1990.

6. Lozovskii, V.N., Konstantinova, G.S., andLozovskii, S.V., Nanotechnology in Electronics. Intro�duction to Speciality, St. Petersburg: Lan’, 2008.

7. Ngo Quoc, Yamada Toshishige, Suzuki Makoto, Ogmi�nami Yusuke, Cassell,A.M., Li Yun, Meyyappan, M.,and Yang Cary, Y., Structural and Electrical Character�ization of Carbon Nanofibers for Interconnect Via

Applications, IEEE Transactions on Nanotechnology,2007, vol. 6, no. 6, pp. 688–695.

8. Petrina, A.M., Carbon nanotubes for nanomanipula�tion, NTI. Ser. 2, 2010, no. 2, pp. 31–40.

9. Preuss, A., Microsoft will in den Robotermarkt, VDI –Nachrichten, 2007, no. 8, p. 13.

10. Ferreira, A. and Mavroidis, C., Virtual Reality andHaptics for Nanorobotics, IEEE Robotics & AutomationMagazine, 2006, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 78–92.

11. Gates, Bill, Mechanical Future. Microsoft PredictsRevolution in the Sphere of Robotics, V Mire Nauki,2007, no. 5, pp. 36–43.

12. Fatikov, S., Wich, T., Hulsen H., Sievers, T., andMarco, J., Microrobot System for Automatic Nano�handling Inside a Scanning Electron Microscope,IEEE/ASME Trasactions on Mechatronics, 2007,vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 244–252.

13. Joachim, C. and Plevert, L., Nanoscience: la Revolu�tion Invisible, Paris: Sciences Ouvertes, Le Seuil, 2008.

14. Hansen, L.T., Kuhle, A., Sorensen, A.H., Bohr, J., andLindelof, P.E., A Technique for Positioning Nanoparti�cles Using an Atomic Force Microscope, Nanotechnol�ogy, 1998, vol. 9, pp. 337–342.

15. Indermuhe, P.E., Schurman, G., Racin, G.A., andRooij, N.E., Atomic Force Microscope Using Cantile�vers with Integrated Tips and Piezoelectric Layers forActuation and Detection, J. Micromech. Microeng,1997, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 218–220.

16. Baris, A., Hiroaki, S., Hashimoto, H., Kee, P.M., andMetin, S., Man�Machine Interface for Micro/NanoManipulation with an AFM Probe, Proc. 32nd Int.Symp. Robotics, 2001, pp. 670–675.

17. Li, G., Xi, N., Chen, H., Saeed, A., and Yu, M., Assemblyof Nanostructure Using AFM Based Nanomanipula�tion System, Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Robotics Automation,2004, pp. 428–433.

18. Erne, T., Hauert, P., Goldberg, K., Zesch, W., and Sieg�wart, R., Microassembly Using Auditory Display of ForceFeedback, Proc. SPIE, 1999, vol. 3834, pp. 203–209.

19. Fahlbusch, S., Shirinov, A., and Fatikow, S., AFM�Based Micro Force Sensor and Haptic Interface for aNanohandling Robot, Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. RobotAutom, 2001, vol. 2, pp. 1772–1777.

20. Feddema, T., Xavier, P., and Brown, R., Micro�Assem�bly Planning with Van�der�Waals Force, J. Micro�mechatron, 2001, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 139–153.

21. Dong, Lixin, Arai, Fumihito, and Fukuda, Toshio,Destructive Constructions of Nanostructures with Car�bon Nanotubes through Nanorobotic Manipulation,IEEE Ttrans. on Mechatronics, 2004, vol. 9, no. 2,pp. 350–357.

22. Jang, J.E., Cha, S.N., Choi, Yo., Kang, D.J.,Hasko, D.G., Jung, J.E., Kim, J.M., and AmaratungaGehan, A.J., A Nanogripper Employing Aligned Mul�tiwall Carbon Nanotubes, IEEE Transactions on Nano�technology, 2008, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 389–393.

23. Dequesnes, M., Rotkin, S.V., and Aluru, N.R., Calcu�lation of Pull in Voltages for Carbon�Nanotube�Based



Nanoelectromechanical Switches, Nanotechnology,2002, vol. 13, pp. 120–131.

24. Guthold, M., Falvo, M.R., Garrett, M.W., Paulson, S.,Washburn, S., Erie, D. A., Superfine, R., Brooks, F.P.,and Taylor R.M., Controlled Manipulation of Molecu�lar Samples with the NanoManipulator, IEEE/ASMETransactions on Mechatronics, 2000, vol. 5, no. 2,pp. 189–198.

25. Donald, B.R., Levey, C.G., McGray, C.D., Paprothy, I.,and Rus, D., An Untethered, Electrostatic, Globally

Controllable MEMS Micro�Robot, J. of Microelectro�mechanical Systems, 2006, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 1–15.

26. Wood, R.J., Avadhanula, S., Sanai, R., Steltz, E., andFearing, R.S., Microrobot Design Using Fiber Rein�forced Composites, Trans. ASME. Journal of Mechani�cal Design, 2008, vol. 130, pp. 052304/1�052304/11.

27. Petrina, A.M., Designing Elements for Micro� andNanomanipulation Systems, NTI. Ser. 2, 2009, no. 7,pp. 23–31.

robotics: from “micro” to “nano”

Documents