CMC Microsystems

 



Technical Advistory Committee

The Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) was initially established to provide advice about microchip research and possible developments when many key physical dimensions within the chips were on the scale of microns to millimetres. The technological and related business insights of TAC members over the years have contributed to CMC decisions that today concern dimensions that span from nanometres to millimetres. When the TAC was first set up, the emerging terminology was “very large scale integration”, known as VLSI; the direction taken today continues the integration theme but the VLSI terminology doesn’t stretch to cover investigations of quite complex embedded system technology.

During the most recent deliberations of the TAC, advancement of the state of the art in information and communication technologies (ICT) was either a central topic or an underlying assumption. ICT was described as foundational for advancements in other fields of research, either as an integral technology or as a requirement in novel analytical instrumentation. Much of the debate concerned achieving a balance in the support needed to explore base technologies or their applications or co-dependencies.  These discussions often considered a context in which to place the research—basic science or applications or industrial sectors—with the goal that CMC delivers technological infrastructure that fits Canada’s science and technology priorities. The principal one is ICT, a measured priority among existing users, and increasingly health and life sciences, noted as a research preference second only to ICT and having a positive growth trend.

These deliberations were translated into more specific guidance that was incorporated into two major National Design Network (NDN) proposals as well as CMC’s annual plans. The proposals anticipate research participants who investigate and/or use microscale and nanoscale physical technologies (principally microelectronics), embedded software and novel materials; that many projects will lead to heterogeneous 3D form-factor microsystems; and that advances will occur in the individual technologies, in the means of their integration and in reduction in some feature sizes by an order of magnitude to the 1 to 10 nanometre range. In the informal vernacular, this is about continuing the transition to “More than Moore” R&D. For the 37-university NDN infrastructure proposal submission to the Canada Foundation for Innovation, this would mean that the core activity is delivering design technology and proof-of-concept environments (PCEs), including rapid prototyping technology and use of a real-time embedded software laboratory. For the 45-university NDN infrastructure proposal submission to the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, this would mean the core activity is delivering access to microchip fabrication and multi-technology integration prototyping and also delivering related kits and methods to be used for purposes of design and test. The proposals, while complementary, each address some of the following and in combination they enable better coverage (horizontally and vertically in the list):

  • System product
  • Programmable platforms, networks, application software, bio-functionalization, models
  • Packaging, domain interfaces, interconnects and hardware, embedded software, embedded molecular functionalization, programmable hardware, models
  • Electronics, photonics, optoelectronics, microfluidics, MEMS, emerging technologies, models
  • Material engineering

Lead-client researchers have participated for a couple of years with CMC in configuring an experimental microfluidics platform—the predecessor to a PCE. It was used to assess and demonstrate the performance of specific devices or modules or software in a relevant system-like configuration. The PCE concept goes further to emphasize modularity and interoperability with the intent to provide opportunities for exploring architecture and trade-offs among hardware and software components. The TAC reviewed plans for five basic PCE configurations:

  1. Microfabrication techniques and modules enabling cubic-centimetre-sized microsystem prototypes (e.g., wearable, wireless, self-powered heart monitor).
  2. Portable, commercially available coin-sized modules for rapid assembly into sensor networks for research experiments (e.g., environmental sensing of toxins in animal habitats).
  3. Lab bench-top instrumentation for multi-technology device validation in a system context (e.g., microfluidics electrophoresis device in a fixture with programmable power supplies, temperature-controlled device fixture, light source, camera, hardware accelerator for signal processing).
  4. Lab bench-top, high-performance development boards with programmable hardware for realizing multi-processor custom computers and algorithms (e.g., molecular dynamics modeling).
  5. Portable, USB-connected development boards for student training (e.g., MEMS hardware/software co-design example).

It was noted that there is considerable scope for the PCE infrastructure to be somewhat customized to specific areas of science and technology although the research community of users might use them to satisfy diverse interests. However, reference designs, viewed as a means to demonstrate a PCE, to assist training and to serve as a template, should align with the priority areas of ICT and/or life sciences. The guidance from the TAC included views about mapping the use of the PCE to stages of research that in some cases proceed outside of scientific merit toward commercially attractive results. Also, it was observed that the PCE and constituent devices or modules are of an experimental nature which is consistent with the state of complexity and maturity of integrated microsystems. In order to assist research across several fronts without dependence on experimentation, it would be necessary to continue to acquire and to deliver technology that bridges the gap between modeling of embedded multiple-technologies+software and actual physical implementations.

Each TAC meeting is designed at least in part as a mini-workshop. There is a core of members providing continuity from one meeting to the next. To deal with the complexity and specific topics that are the focus of a particular meeting, the TAC members are ably assisted by invited guest experts. The Canadian research community ultimately benefits from the shared insights and advice. The engaged and energetic participation of TAC members and their guests is gratefully acknowledged as it continues to shape Canada’s National Design Network.