Difference between revisions of "Wobbly finger problem"
m (→Deflections from accelerations from machine motions - a non-issue: typofix) |
m |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 34: | Line 34: | ||
* [[Jittery finger problem]] | * [[Jittery finger problem]] | ||
* [[Thermal motion]] | * [[Thermal motion]] | ||
| + | ---- | ||
| + | * [[Misleading aspects in animations of diamondoid molecular machine elements]] | ||
| + | * [[Gem-gum]] | ||
Latest revision as of 06:31, 15 September 2024
Up: Finger problems
This page is completing the finger problems pages.
Beyond fat fingers and sticky fingers, sloppy fingers and jittery fingers suggest themselves.
Deflections (sloppy wobbling) from thermal motions
The concern here is that it may not be possible to have stiff enough nanorobotic machinery and tooltips to allow for positionally atomically precise mechanosynthesis.
In desirable far term target context (somewhat exploratory engineering):
This has been analyzed theoretically in the tooltip cycle paper.
Results are that this is managable with plenty of headroom.
In the more near term pathways context:
– For the direct path this has been experimentally confirmed to work at least via macroscopic robotics in SPM microscopy.
– For the incremental path sloppy fingers still apply unless combining advantages of different selfassembly technologies to get an especially stiff core in a lagre complex enough positional system (e.g. foldamer printer). Which has not yet been experimentally accessed (as of 2023).
Deflections from accelerations from machine motions - a non-issue
Worried about how absolute stiffness diminishes with scale?
See page "same relative deflections across scales" for an explanation regarding why
this is not a problem in the context of accelerations from machine motions at proposed speeds of about ~5mm/s.
Related
- Stiffness
- Same relative deflections across scales
- How absolute stiffness diminishes with scale, see scaling laws for now.
