Assembly layer - Revision history

Apm: Category:Far term target

2026-03-29T18:10:33Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:10, 29 March 2026
Line 136:		Line 136:
	[[Category:Nanofactory]]		[[Category:Nanofactory]]
	[[Category:Site specific definitions]]		[[Category:Site specific definitions]]
			[[Category:Far term target]]

Apm: /* Related */

2025-02-19T08:31:08Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:31, 19 February 2025
Line 130:		Line 130:
	* [[Gemstone metamaterial on chip factory]]		* [[Gemstone metamaterial on chip factory]]
	* '''[[Productive Nanosystems From molecules to superproducts]]'''		* '''[[Productive Nanosystems From molecules to superproducts]]'''
			----
			* [[Terminology for spacial places]]

	[[Category:General]]		[[Category:General]]
	[[Category:Nanofactory]]		[[Category:Nanofactory]]
	[[Category:Site specific definitions]]		[[Category:Site specific definitions]]

Apm: /* Slowdown through stepsize */ added link Math of convergent assembly

2024-02-11T09:45:07Z

Slowdown through stepsize: added link Math of convergent assembly

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:45, 11 February 2024
Line 60:		Line 60:
	To avoid a bottleneck all stepsizes in the stack of assembly layers should be similar.		To avoid a bottleneck all stepsizes in the stack of assembly layers should be similar.

	See main page: [[Branching factor]]		See main page: [[Branching factor]] <br>
			Also: [[Math of convergent assembly]]

	== Consequence of lack of layers ==		== Consequence of lack of layers ==

Apm: /* Assemblers */

2024-02-11T09:36:02Z

Assemblers

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:36, 11 February 2024
Line 81:		Line 81:
	* may lead to a bottleneck at the upper [[convergent assembly]] levels.		* may lead to a bottleneck at the upper [[convergent assembly]] levels.

	=== ~~Assemblers~~ ===		=== Compact monolithic diamondoid molecular assemblers ===

	In the early (and now outdated) "universal diamondoid [[molecular assembler]]" concept space is also filled completely with production machinery.		In the early (and now outdated) "universal diamondoid [[molecular assembler]]" concept space is also filled completely with production machinery.

Apm: /* Maximizing productivity */

2024-02-11T09:34:56Z

Maximizing productivity

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:34, 11 February 2024
Line 71:		Line 71:
	== Maximizing productivity ==		== Maximizing productivity ==

	For all but the most extreme applications a stratified design ~~will~~ work well.		For all but the most extreme applications a stratified design should work well.
	Going beyond that it becomes tedious. As an analogy one can compare it to going from very useful PCs to more specialised grapic cards.		Going beyond that it becomes tedious. As an analogy one can compare it to going from very useful PCs to more specialised grapic cards.

Apm: /* Consequence of lack of layers */ added Higher throughput of smaller machinery and note on constant speeds

2024-02-11T09:34:10Z

Consequence of lack of layers: added Higher throughput of smaller machinery and note on constant speeds

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:34, 11 February 2024
Line 66:		Line 66:
	Using a tree structure instead of a stack means halving the size leads to more then four subunits and the upper [[convergent assembly]] layers can potentially become a bottleneck.		Using a tree structure instead of a stack means halving the size leads to more then four subunits and the upper [[convergent assembly]] layers can potentially become a bottleneck.

	Since every layer has the same productivity (mass per time) the very thin bottommost layer has the same productivity as the (practically or hypothetically implementet) uppermost [[convergent assembly]] layer - a single cube with the size of the sidelength of the factory. This lets the density of productivity (productivity per volume) explode - but there are issues.		Since (when assuming constant operating speeds across all assembly layers) every layer has the same productivity (mass per time) the very thin bottommost layer has the same productivity as the (practically or hypothetically implementet) uppermost [[convergent assembly]] layer - a single cube with the size of the sidelength of the factory. This lets the density of productivity (productivity per volume) explode - but there are issues. <br>
			See: [[Higher throughput of smaller machinery]]

	== Maximizing productivity ==		== Maximizing productivity ==

Apm: /* Slowdown through stepsize */ Branching factor

2024-02-11T09:29:04Z

Slowdown through stepsize: Branching factor

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:29, 11 February 2024
Line 58:		Line 58:
	Increased stepsizes bring the benefit of less design restrictions in the products (fewer borders).		Increased stepsizes bring the benefit of less design restrictions in the products (fewer borders).
	The slowdown incurred by bigger stepsizes can in bounds be compensated with parallelity in parts assembly.		The slowdown incurred by bigger stepsizes can in bounds be compensated with parallelity in parts assembly.
	To avoid a bottleneck all stepsizes in the stack should be similar.		To avoid a bottleneck all stepsizes in the stack of assembly layers should be similar.

			See main page: [[Branching factor]]

	== Consequence of lack of layers ==		== Consequence of lack of layers ==

Apm: /* Slowdown through stepsize */ replaced exponential assembly or self replication with bootstrapping methods for productive nanosystems

2024-02-11T09:26:18Z

Slowdown through stepsize: replaced exponential assembly or self replication with bootstrapping methods for productive nanosystems

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:26, 11 February 2024
Line 54:		Line 54:
	Increasing the size of a step between layers slows down the throughput due to a shrinking number of manipulators per surface area.		Increasing the size of a step between layers slows down the throughput due to a shrinking number of manipulators per surface area.
	In the extreme case one has one scanning probe microscope for a whole [//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mole_%28unit%29 mole] of particles. There it would take times way beyond the age of the universe to assemble anything human hand sized.		In the extreme case one has one scanning probe microscope for a whole [//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mole_%28unit%29 mole] of particles. There it would take times way beyond the age of the universe to assemble anything human hand sized.
	This by the way is the reason why massive parallelity gained by ~~either~~ [[~~exponential assembly]] or [[self replication~~]] is an absolute necessary.		This by the way is the reason why massive parallelity gained by [[bootstrapping methods for productive nanosystems]] is an absolute necessary.

	Increased stepsizes bring the benefit of less design restrictions in the products (fewer borders).		Increased stepsizes bring the benefit of less design restrictions in the products (fewer borders).

Apm: /* Higher speeds for larger scale convergent assembly layers */ added car wheel swap example

2024-02-11T09:14:31Z

Higher speeds for larger scale convergent assembly layers: added car wheel swap example

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:14, 11 February 2024
Line 46:		Line 46:
	The the total volume of the larger scale assembly layers is smaller than the the total volume of the bottom-most assembly layers due to factory style optimizations in [[convergent assembly]]. Thus part of the increase in operation speeds is natural and mandatory anyways. Going beyond that …		The the total volume of the larger scale assembly layers is smaller than the the total volume of the bottom-most assembly layers due to factory style optimizations in [[convergent assembly]]. Thus part of the increase in operation speeds is natural and mandatory anyways. Going beyond that …

	When using higher speeds at the higher convergent assembly levels one can either consent to being only able to use those speeds for recycling of pre-produced parts or one needs to change the [[nanofactory]] to a more fractal design with increasing branching at the bottom end of the stack of convergent assembly. See more general concept: [[Assembly levels]].		When using higher speeds at the higher convergent assembly levels one can either consent to being only able to use those speeds for recycling of pre-produced parts (just swapping front and back wheels of a car in the extreme of large scales) or one needs to change the [[nanofactory]] to a more fractal design with increasing branching at the bottom end of the stack of convergent assembly. See more general concept: [[Assembly levels]].

	Going to the extreme at some point speeds get limited through acceleration forces (a spinning thin-walled tube ring made from nanotubes ruptures at around 3km/s independent of scale) much sooner mechanical resonances and probably some other problems will occur (acceleration & breaking losses?). Related: [[Unsupported rotating ring speed limit]]		Going to the extreme at some point speeds get limited through acceleration forces (a spinning thin-walled tube ring made from nanotubes ruptures at around 3km/s independent of scale) much sooner mechanical resonances and probably some other problems will occur (acceleration & breaking losses?). Related: [[Unsupported rotating ring speed limit]]

Apm: /* (Falsely) assuming constant operation speeds across the convergent assembly layers */

2024-02-11T09:11:59Z

(Falsely) assuming constant operation speeds across the convergent assembly layers

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:11, 11 February 2024
Line 38:		Line 38:
	(See also: [[Increasing bearing area to decrease friction]].)		(See also: [[Increasing bearing area to decrease friction]].)
	That is: If the bearing surface it is instead kept constant by making bigger bearings multi shelled like described on page [[infinitesimal bearings]], then operation speed distributes over the bearing sub-layers and is thus lowered.		That is: If the bearing surface it is instead kept constant by making bigger bearings multi shelled like described on page [[infinitesimal bearings]], then operation speed distributes over the bearing sub-layers and is thus lowered.
	More layers make friction rise linearly, but the drop in bearing sub-layer speed (operation speeds are still constant across assembly layers!) makes the dynamic friction losses drop quardatically. So combining the two effects (bearing sub-area-up & bearing-subspeed-down) the friction losses drops linearly. This is atop the linear drop from before.		More layers make friction rise linearly, but the drop in bearing sub-layer speed (operation speeds are still assumed constant across assembly layers!) makes the dynamic friction losses drop quardatically. So combining the two effects (bearing sub-area-up & bearing-subspeed-down) the friction losses drops linearly. This is atop the linear drop from before.

	The two former (scaling law & infinitesimal bearing trick) combined give a quadratic drop in dynamic friction losses going up the assembly layers. This would be massive underused potential. Instead we want to speed up operation speeds when going up the convergent assembly layers.		The two former (scaling law & infinitesimal bearing trick) combined give a quadratic drop in dynamic friction losses going up the assembly layers. This would be massive underused potential. Instead we want to speed up operation speeds when going up the convergent assembly layers.