Posted on 11/19/2012 7:38:08 AM PST by Red Badger
Current hard-drive designs are reaching their limit in data storage, but a new manufacturing technique could allow drive capacities to keep expanding.
A technique that enables the nanopatterned layers that store data in hard disk drives to assemble themselves has been improved to better suit mass production, and could enable disks that store five times as much data as the largest available today.
Using self-assembly instead of machines that print or etch out features has long been considered a potential solution to a looming barrier to expanding the capacity of hard-disk designs. Researchers at the University of Texas at Austin have now worked out a solution to a problem that made self-assembly incompatible with existing factories.
Hard disks store data on a spinning disk, written into a pattern of magnetized regions on a magnetic coating. For decades, gains in hard-drive capacity have come from packing those regions—and hence data—more densely. But now they can’t be positioned much closer together without magnetic interference endangering the reliability of data storage.
Covering a disk platter with physically separate dots of magnetic material instead of a continuous coat would allow much denser storage, since interference between the dots would be prevented by the gaps between them. But existing manufacturing methods can’t reliably make discrete islands spaced closer than about 30 nanometers apart, producing much the same data density as conventional hard-disk designs today.
Grant Willson, a materials science professor at UT Austin, working with UT Austin chemistry professor Christopher Ellis, has found a way to create magnetic islands much more tightly packed than existing production tools are able to make. That new method uses a block of copolymers—long-chain molecules made of “blocks” of different polymers—that can assemble themselves into regular, and very small, repeating patterns. The patterns can be guided by choosing the right combination of polymers, and adding patterns to the surface they are applied to. Once formed, such a pattern can be used as a template to create dots of magnetic material on a hard-disk platter.
That approach has been held back by the challenge of getting long copolymer molecules to lay flat using a method compatible with existing factories. The UT Austin group announced last week that it had solved the problem by inventing a top-coat layer—also a polymer—that shuffles the copolymers into the right orientation.
“You just spin-coat a couple more layers than usual and heat the thing with the hot plate that's already in there,” says Willson. When the polymer top coat is applied, it is inactive, and bound up with ammonium ions. Heating drives off ammonia and switches the top-coat polymer into a new structure that interacts with the copolymer layer and encourages it to move into the desired orientation. The top coat is then washed off, leaving behind the copolymers and the structures they assembled into.
That process can be done in less than 30 seconds, faster than the current slowest step on a hard-disk platter manufacturing line, says Willson. So far, the group has shown that it can lay down patterns with details as fine as 10 nanometers. Willson estimates that this would allow hard drives to store data at five times their current density, approximately one terabit of information (1,024 gigabytes) per square inch.
HGST, a storage company owned by Western Digital, is investigating how the technique could be integrated into existing production lines. Willson says that his top coat will also need to be tuned for production by companies that specialize in semiconductor manufacturing.
James Watkins, director of the center for hierarchical manufacturing at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, says that improvements are also needed to copolymers themselves before the self-assembly method can be used commercially. “One challenge is to achieve long-range order using copolymers without defects over large areas,” he says. With millions of data-storing dots on a disk’s platter, error rates must be very low to avoid significant numbers of them being positioned incorrectly.
Fine lines: Polymer molecules assembled themselves into the regular pattern of 10 nanometer-wide corridors in the larger of these two microscope images, thanks to the use of a new coating that helps the molecules align correctly. The smaller image shows that without the coating, the polymers don’t form organized structure
Tech Ping!......
I’m surprised the industry is still so focused on spinning disk for storage, but considering the longevity and rewriteability of spinning disk vs. SSD, I suppose there’s room for improvement.
Could 10TiB - 15 TiB spinning disk be in our future?
At “one terabit of information (1,024 gigabytes) per square inch” they will be in your iPod.......
That is a heck of a lot of data capacity.
Right !! This is the story of my life.... Just when my first 1TB drive is making it’s way from Tiger Direct to my house in the back of a UPS truck...sigh
That depends on how many pr0n videos you want to store........
My first HDD was a 40MB Seagate. I paid over $300, mail order. I wondered how in heck I could EVER fill such a thing..........
It should be enough capacity for at least one Jerry Garcia guitar solo.
“My first HDD was a 40MB Seagate”
First one I ever bought was for our IBM AT (bigger brother to the PC). A huge metal can that held an astounding 5 megs, and only cost $1800+. Of course at the time, money wasn’t a concern because after all, nobody could ever fill up 5 megs. And compared to those big 8” floppies that only held 180k, we were now in the big leagues!
So, do they actually mean “5 FOLD” (32 times),
or do they mean “5 times”?
I have a file drawer full of those,I'll let 'em go cheap (8^)
I wish they would just let it die and force the move to solid state so the price would drop to reasonable levels. Problem with mechanical, multi-TB drives is that you need to use some sort of RAID method and a second backup due to the possible loss of huge amounts of data when even a single unit fails. It’s not like the old days, the failure rate on this garbage is high... I’d say 30% after 2 yrs of service. It’s gotten so bad, I mirror all my work on hot-pluggable docks and rotate them in and out of the safe deposit box.
5X..........
Mine was great until I loaded Windows 3.0
Mine was great until I loaded Windows 3.0
Mine was great until I loaded Windows 3.1
Mine was great until I loaded Windows 95
Mine was great until I loaded Windows 98
Mine was great until I loaded Windows 98SE
Mine was great until I loaded Windows ME
Mine was great until I loaded Windows NT
Mine was great until I loaded Windows 2000
Mine was great until I loaded Windows XP
Mine was great until I loaded Windows Vista
Mine was great until I loaded Windows..........
iDevices won’t use platter disks of any form due to weight, shock, and power issues.
These are more likely to be used in large data centers where SSD is impractical and RAID arrays are par for the course to handle failed drives.
If you're anything like me, you'll have files 10 times bigger than that now.
A friend of mine has an MP3 player with a small HDD inside......
Great, now you can lose 5 times more stuff when the drive tanks!
RAID is one of the “good” four-letter words.
Darn, I guess that makes me a dinosaur. I seem to recall my first HDD was a Seagate 10 Mb, at least I think it was a Seagate, that cost me somewhere about $800 and the size was huge comparatively speaking and put off a bit of heat. And I thought I was flying along with my 300 baud acoustic modem, my Apple PC 4 bit machine. The 1200/2400 baud fax modems were just coming out. Seems only yesterday.
Wow, that’s a lot of pr0n.
Unless you're a bug.
People have been predicting “the end of hard disk drives in 3 years”...for the last 15 years. They always come up with something to increase the bit density. It’s going to be a while before semiconductor memory hits the cost per bit shown in this article.
Spinning disk might go the way of the dodo but not for a while yet, it seems. The cost per byte is too great for SSDs to make them commercially viable for long-term storage. Fact remains, if you want something that’ll last for a long time and store your data longer than removable media, you want a spinning disk drive.
For performance at this point, you can’t go wrong with SSD.
Darn, I guess that makes me a dinosaur. I seem to recall my first HDD was a Seagate 10 Mb
I remember those. We bought quite a few to sell with our applications - healthcare financial planning (really Medicare reimbursement planning) systems. It was still cheaper, faster, and more reliable than the IBM mainframe systems it replaced. More dollars in our pockets, heheh.
Those were the days and I have many fond memories of the early days. After holding out for a few more years I eventually transitioned to the 286 as well. As much as I loved my Mac at the time there was little real software being written for it and I needed more than what Apple was offering in those early days.
The first hard drive I worked with held 32K words of 12 bits each, so that would be 48 KBytes. It was head-per-track, so it didn’t have any moving arm.
I think it cost us about $6000.
I also recall a business partner spending good money to upgrade our CMP machines from 48k of RAM to 64k of RAM.
Who in the world could possibly use 64k of RAM?
One issue with SSD is that even if the entire chip-manufacturing capacity of the entire world were dedicated to SSD, it would take a long time to reach the total storage capacity output of a week’s worth of spinning-rust disks.
Science in the service of porn, what could be better?
So someone at MIT doesn't know the difference between bits and bytes?
On a personal computer I can't see any need for more than 300GB hard drive. Unless you are storing movies and home videos. BlueRay movies can eat up 25GB so I hear
If you are storing movies they should be on an external hard drive anyway. An external hard drive should last a lot longer than one in a computer
Reporters aren’t good at math........That’s why they are reporters.......
Puppy Linux is OKAY, if you just like being on Free Republic
I like Ubuntu Linux, it’s pretty good and stable
Reporters: Unencumbered by the thought process.
My first HDD was about 100MB. I was a late bloomer with my Tandy 486SX, Windows 3.11 computer with 1x CD drive.
I remember deleting a gae to play a different game. I remember getting “bad sectors” on every scan.
Can you imagine if this reporter had just learned about WinZip?
lolz
For some strange reason, Ubuntu 12.04 and Mint 13 do not run correctly on my primary computer - probably a video driver issue. However, I ran Puppy all day yesterday.
What was the problem with Ubuntu?
When I first installed it, the OS didn’t utilize some of my screen, as if my screen were smaller- leaving the sides black and inacessible.
That was fixed easily enough. I had to increase the screen resolution.
I have enough 1 Tb or larger devices....I now need a good RAID card,...but man they are expensive.
Great! This will allow sloppy programmers to require even MORE storage capacity, and get away with it.
The base Windows OS will probably be 100GB after a fresh/clean install....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.