In 1991, Sumio Iijima’s discovered multi-walled carbon nanotubes in the insoluble material of arc-burned graphite rods and Mintmire, Dunlap, and White’s independent prediction that if single-walled carbon nanotubes could be made, then they would exhibit remarkable conducting properties helped create the initial buzz that is now associated with carbon nanotubes.
Nanotube research accelerated greatly following the independent discoveries by Bethune at IBM and Iijima at NEC of single-walled carbon nanotubes and methods to specifically produce them by adding transition-metal catalysts to the carbon in an arc discharge.
It has been very difficult to make larger amounts of carbon nanotubes and to make them longer. It has been even more difficult to combine lots of carbon nanotubes and make the combined material close to the strength of individual carbon nanotubes.
In 2008, it was found individual CNT shells have strengths of up to ≈100 gigapascals (15,000,000 psi). Although the strength of individual CNT shells is extremely high, weak shear interactions between adjacent shells and tubes lead to significant reduction in the effective strength of multi-walled carbon nanotubes and carbon nanotube bundles down to only a few GPa. This limitation has been recently addressed by applying high-energy electron irradiation, which crosslinks inner shells and tubes, and effectively increases the strength of these materials to ≈60 GPa for multi-walled carbon nanotubes and ≈17 GPa for double-walled carbon nanotube bundles.
2008 Cambridge University made 9 GPa ribbons that were a few centimeters long
In 2008, Alan Windle’s team at Cambridge University had created the world’s strongest ribbon. Prof. Windle’s research team at the University of Cambridge seemed to lead the way towards super-strong tethers. As Cambridge researcher Dr. Marcelo Motta pointed out they are currently able to produce almost cm long individual macroscopic CNT threads with tensile strength of up to 9 N/tex which compares to about 9 GPa at the given density of their material. Scaling up the Cambridge laboratory process to industrial production and spinning these threads, ropes and cables with 10 GPa should be soon feasible.
They were not able to scale up to industrial production.
2016 9.6 gigapascal films
In 2016, Jian Nong Wang and his colleagues made nanotubes with a process akin to glass blowing: Using a stream of nitrogen gas, they injected ethanol, with a small amount of ferrocene and thiophene added as catalysts, into a 50-mm-wide horizontal tube placed in furnace at 1,150–1,130 °C. They packed the nanotubes even more densely by pressing the film repeatedly between two rollers.
Wei Xu, Yun Chen, Hang Zhan, and Jian Nong Wang of the Nano Carbon Research Center, School of Mechanical and Power Engineering, East China University of Science and Technology and the School of Materials Science and Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University.
The resulting films had an average strength of 9.6 gigapascals. By comparison, the strength of nanotube films made so far has been around 2 GPa, while that for Kevlar fibers and commercially used carbon fibers is around 3.7 and 7 GPa, respectively. The films are four times as pliable as conventional carbon fibers, and can elongate by 8% on average as opposed to 2% for carbon fibers.
2018 Tsinghau University and Beijing researchers have made 80 Gigapascal tensile strength bundles
Finally ultralong (several centimeter) carbon nanotube fibers have been made into stronger bundles. The tensile strength of CNTBs (Carbon nanotube bundles) is at least 9–45 times that of other materials. If a more rigorous engineering definition is used, the tensile strength of macroscale CNTBs is still 5–24 times that of any other types of engineering fiber, indicating the extraordinary advantages of ultralong Carbon nanotubes in fabricating superstrong fibers.
The work was done at Tsinghua University and other facilities in Beijing. Researchers were Yunxiang Bai, Rufan Zhang, Xuan Ye, Zhenxing Zhu, Huanhuan Xie, Boyuan Shen, Dali Cai, Bofei Liu, Chenxi Zhang, Zhao Jia, Shenli Zhang, Xide Li & Fei Wei.
Fabrication of ultralong Carbon Nanotubes into superstrong bundles
Researchers have fabricated CNTBs that are several centimeters long, using ultralong CNTs with defined number and parallel alignment, to quantitatively investigate the relationship between the tensile strength of ultralong-CNT-based fibers and their components. Generally, the ultralong CNTs are synthesized through a gas-flow directed chemical vapor deposition (CVD) method with parallel orientations and large intertube distance on flat substrates. The resulting CNTs usually have one to three walls with perfect structures.
Brian Wang is a Futurist Thought Leader and a popular Science blogger with 1 million readers per month. His blog Nextbigfuture.com is ranked #1 Science News Blog. It covers many disruptive technology and trends including Space, Robotics, Artificial Intelligence, Medicine, Anti-aging Biotechnology, and Nanotechnology.
Known for identifying cutting edge technologies, he is currently a Co-Founder of a startup and fundraiser for high potential early-stage companies. He is the Head of Research for Allocations for deep technology investments and an Angel Investor at Space Angels.
A frequent speaker at corporations, he has been a TEDx speaker, a Singularity University speaker and guest at numerous interviews for radio and podcasts. He is open to public speaking and advising engagements.
No, Young’s modulus is not a measure of strength. In many cases it correlates with strength, but you can have a stiff material with low strength (such as a cracker biscuit) compared to a not stiff material with much greater strength (such as rubber). Apply a small load to the same sized bit of rubber or cracker, the rubber will stretch and the cracker will not. Apply a bit more load, the cracker will crack and crumble, the rubber will just stretch a bit more.
No Young’s modulus is not a measure of strength.In many cases it correlates with strength but you can have a stiff material with low strength (such as a cracker biscuit) compared to a not stiff material with much greater strength (such as rubber).Apply a small load to the same sized bit of rubber or cracker the rubber will stretch and the cracker will not.Apply a bit more load the cracker will crack and crumble the rubber will just stretch a bit more.
That’s true but Youngs modulus is one of the most important measures of a materials strength. Fiber glass-E and graphite reinforcing fibers are rated by their young’s moduli. The highest strength graphite fibers have 531 GPa Young’s (elastic) modulus.
That’s true but Youngs modulus is one of the most important measures of a materials strength. Fiber glass-E and graphite reinforcing fibers are rated by their young’s moduli. The highest strength graphite fibers have 531 GPa Young’s (elastic) modulus.
Minor correction: elongation (or in the technical terminology, strain) is the *change* in length divided by the original length. In other words: [new length – original length] / [original length].
Minor correction: elongation (or in the technical terminology strain) is the *change* in length divided by the original length. In other words: [new length – original length] / [original length].
To clarify a bit more material engineering, Young modulus is a measure of stiffness, which is a separate property from strength. Strength means how much load a material can take before breaking. Stiffness means how much load you need to apply to elastically stretch a material (elastic stretching means the material will revert back to its previous shape when you remove the load – vs plastic stretching, where the deformation remains). More specifically, the Young modulus is the ratio between the applied load and the resulting elongation. The higher this ratio, the more force you need to apply to stretch the material (= stiffer). It affects bending and other forms of deformation in a similar way, but the equations are a bit different. Elongation is a unit-less number (new length divided by original length), usually less than 0.1. That’s why the Young modulus has the same units as the strength, but is usually a much larger number. For reference, the Young modulus of a single CNT is ~1000 GPa, similar to diamond. Steel is ~200.
To clarify a bit more material engineering Young modulus is a measure of stiffness which is a separate property from strength. Strength means how much load a material can take before breaking. Stiffness means how much load you need to apply to elastically stretch a material (elastic stretching means the material will revert back to its previous shape when you remove the load – vs plastic stretching where the deformation remains).More specifically the Young modulus is the ratio between the applied load and the resulting elongation. The higher this ratio the more force you need to apply to stretch the material (= stiffer). It affects bending and other forms of deformation in a similar way but the equations are a bit different.Elongation is a unit-less number (new length divided by original length) usually less than 0.1. That’s why the Young modulus has the same units as the strength but is usually a much larger number.For reference the Young modulus of a single CNT is ~1000 GPa similar to diamond. Steel is ~200.
In 2008, it was found individual CNT shells have strengths of up to ≈100 gigapascals (15,000,000 psi). Although the strength of individual CNT shells is extremely high, weak shear interactions between adjacent shells and tubes lead to significant reduction in the effective strength of multi-walled carbon nanotubes and carbon nanotube bundles down to only a few GPa. This limitation has been recently addressed by applying high-energy electron irradiation, which crosslinks inner shells and tubes, and effectively increases the strength of these materials to ≈60 GPa for multi-walled carbon nanotubes and ≈17 GPa for double-walled carbon nanotube bundles.” The above experiments are referenced in a Patent issued August 28, 2018. US 10,059,595– Ultra High Strength Nanomaterials And Methods of Manufacture claims to use the above irradiation methods to manufacture tapes and fibers with 700 GPa Young’s modulus! Somebody beat them to it!
In 2008 it was found individual CNT shells have strengths of up to ≈100 gigapascals (150000 psi). Although the strength of individual CNT shells is extremely high weak shear interactions between adjacent shells and tubes lead to significant reduction in the effective strength of multi-walled carbon nanotubes and carbon nanotube bundles down to only a few GPa. This limitation has been recently addressed by applying high-energy electron irradiation which crosslinks inner shells and tubes” and effectively increases the strength of these materials to ≈60 GPa for multi-walled carbon nanotubes and ≈17 GPa for double-walled carbon nanotube bundles.””The above experiments are referenced in a Patent issued August 28″” 2018. US 1059″”595– Ultra High Strength Nanomaterials And Methods of Manufacture claims to use the above irradiation methods to manufacture tapes and fibers with 700 GPa Young’s modulus! Somebody beat them to it!”””””””
I’m not talking about Brexit. I’m talking about seasteading.
I’m not talking about Brexit. I’m talking about seasteading.
The NASA design was not vague at all. It required seven Shuttle flights for an initial cable, which be used to haul up additional cable. Their projected cost was $15 billion. Google “Bradley Edwards space elevator” and you’ll find an 80-page report from the study. It covers a lot of practical details. Edwards also published a book, which you can find on Amazon.
The NASA design was not vague at all. It required seven Shuttle flights for an initial cable which be used to haul up additional cable. Their projected cost was $15 billion.Google Bradley Edwards space elevator”” and you’ll find an 80-page report from the study. It covers a lot of practical details. Edwards also published a book”””” which you can find on Amazon.”””
The current technology is basically a glorified bomb.
The current technology is basically a glorified bomb.
For what? So that people theoretically could haul their *sses into orbit and back? Because no-one will take on the financial burden to build a space elevator.
For what? So that people theoretically could haul their *sses into orbit and back? Because no-one will take on the financial burden to build a space elevator.
Well the other option is the rotovator, which is a glorified slingshot throwing you to orbital velocity.
Well the other option is the rotovator which is a glorified slingshot throwing you to orbital velocity.
Sufficient” is a VERY vague term for that application. The space elevator can be done with existing materials, it just takes a cable with such an extreme taper that the total mass you have to put into orbit becomes millions and millions of tonnes. As the materials improve, the cost comes down. So “sufficient” is really a comment about the assumed money available, rather than a fundamental property of the materials.
Sufficient”” is a VERY vague term for that application.The space elevator can be done with existing materials”” it just takes a cable with such an extreme taper that the total mass you have to put into orbit becomes millions and millions of tonnes.As the materials improve”” the cost comes down. So “”””sufficient”””” is really a comment about the assumed money available”””” rather than a fundamental property of the materials.”””
For once this is a call for a Manhattan project that actually makes sense. The Manhattan project (and the Apollo project) was a project where 1. There was a clear end goal. 2. The basic science was all worked out, it was a matter of engineering a way to apply the science. 3. An expert in the field could sit down and just work out how to throw money (and very, very smart people) at the problem until it was solved. This was one of those times. Once nanotubes were discovered, enough brilliant people with enough resources were going to be able to solve the problem. So many times people call for a “Manhattan project” to solve stuff like a solar powered car or cure cancer or world peace or something where either the basic science isn’t there, or we don’t even know what basic science is even applicable.
For once this is a call for a Manhattan project that actually makes sense.The Manhattan project (and the Apollo project) was a project where1. There was a clear end goal.2. The basic science was all worked out it was a matter of engineering a way to apply the science.3. An expert in the field could sit down and just work out how to throw money (and very very smart people) at the problem until it was solved.This was one of those times. Once nanotubes were discovered enough brilliant people with enough resources were going to be able to solve the problem.So many times people call for a Manhattan project”” to solve stuff like a solar powered car or cure cancer or world peace or something where either the basic science isn’t there”””” or we don’t even know what basic science is even applicable.”””
Brexit is just a political thing. You don’t actually have to tow Britain away from Europe.
Brexit is just a political thing. You don’t actually have to tow Britain away from Europe.
These superstrong nanotubes only have to be 2 to 3 miles long and maybe 6-9 GPa in strength for the application I have in mind. However, the manufacturing process has to be relatively cheap and ideally can be done on an ocean-going ship
These superstrong nanotubes only have to be 2 to 3 miles long and maybe 6-9 GPa in strength for the application I have in mind. However the manufacturing process has to be relatively cheap and ideally can be done on an ocean-going ship
It still sounds weird to have a glorified cable-car accelerating to orbital velocity.
It still sounds weird to have a glorified cable-car accelerating to orbital velocity.
The NASA study in the early 2000s said nanotube strands 7cm long, put together with a realistically strong epoxy, would be sufficient. I don’t know what strength they assumed.
The NASA study in the early 2000s said nanotube strands 7cm long put together with a realistically strong epoxy would be sufficient. I don’t know what strength they assumed.
I heard the bare minimum required for doing a space elevator are 50 GPa in very long strands (like thousands of km). These ones surpass that but in much shorter ones. Not sure they can build them long enough yet, but for many terrestrial applications, that’s revolutionary. Seems like industry has stopped or will soon stop laughing about the space elevator. But we are not there yet.
I heard the bare minimum required for doing a space elevator are 50 GPa in very long strands (like thousands of km). These ones surpass that but in much shorter ones. Not sure they can build them long enough yet but for many terrestrial applications that’s revolutionary.Seems like industry has stopped or will soon stop laughing about the space elevator. But we are not there yet.
We should have put a Manhattan-Project-style effort into this years ago. Now look who has the 80gpa nanofibers — CHINA.
We should have put a Manhattan-Project-style effort into this years ago.Now look who has the 80gpa nanofibers — CHINA.
No, Young’s modulus is not a measure of strength. In many cases it correlates with strength, but you can have a stiff material with low strength (such as a cracker biscuit) compared to a not stiff material with much greater strength (such as rubber). Apply a small load to the same sized bit of rubber or cracker, the rubber will stretch and the cracker will not. Apply a bit more load, the cracker will crack and crumble, the rubber will just stretch a bit more.
No Young’s modulus is not a measure of strength.In many cases it correlates with strength but you can have a stiff material with low strength (such as a cracker biscuit) compared to a not stiff material with much greater strength (such as rubber).Apply a small load to the same sized bit of rubber or cracker the rubber will stretch and the cracker will not.Apply a bit more load the cracker will crack and crumble the rubber will just stretch a bit more.
That’s true but Youngs modulus is one of the most important measures of a materials strength. Fiber glass-E and graphite reinforcing fibers are rated by their young’s moduli. The highest strength graphite fibers have 531 GPa Young’s (elastic) modulus.
That’s true but Youngs modulus is one of the most important measures of a materials strength. Fiber glass-E and graphite reinforcing fibers are rated by their young’s moduli. The highest strength graphite fibers have 531 GPa Young’s (elastic) modulus.
Minor correction: elongation (or in the technical terminology, strain) is the *change* in length divided by the original length. In other words: [new length – original length] / [original length].
Minor correction: elongation (or in the technical terminology strain) is the *change* in length divided by the original length. In other words: [new length – original length] / [original length].
To clarify a bit more material engineering, Young modulus is a measure of stiffness, which is a separate property from strength. Strength means how much load a material can take before breaking. Stiffness means how much load you need to apply to elastically stretch a material (elastic stretching means the material will revert back to its previous shape when you remove the load – vs plastic stretching, where the deformation remains). More specifically, the Young modulus is the ratio between the applied load and the resulting elongation. The higher this ratio, the more force you need to apply to stretch the material (= stiffer). It affects bending and other forms of deformation in a similar way, but the equations are a bit different. Elongation is a unit-less number (new length divided by original length), usually less than 0.1. That’s why the Young modulus has the same units as the strength, but is usually a much larger number. For reference, the Young modulus of a single CNT is ~1000 GPa, similar to diamond. Steel is ~200.
To clarify a bit more material engineering Young modulus is a measure of stiffness which is a separate property from strength. Strength means how much load a material can take before breaking. Stiffness means how much load you need to apply to elastically stretch a material (elastic stretching means the material will revert back to its previous shape when you remove the load – vs plastic stretching where the deformation remains).More specifically the Young modulus is the ratio between the applied load and the resulting elongation. The higher this ratio the more force you need to apply to stretch the material (= stiffer). It affects bending and other forms of deformation in a similar way but the equations are a bit different.Elongation is a unit-less number (new length divided by original length) usually less than 0.1. That’s why the Young modulus has the same units as the strength but is usually a much larger number.For reference the Young modulus of a single CNT is ~1000 GPa similar to diamond. Steel is ~200.
In 2008, it was found individual CNT shells have strengths of up to ≈100 gigapascals (15,000,000 psi). Although the strength of individual CNT shells is extremely high, weak shear interactions between adjacent shells and tubes lead to significant reduction in the effective strength of multi-walled carbon nanotubes and carbon nanotube bundles down to only a few GPa. This limitation has been recently addressed by applying high-energy electron irradiation, which crosslinks inner shells and tubes, and effectively increases the strength of these materials to ≈60 GPa for multi-walled carbon nanotubes and ≈17 GPa for double-walled carbon nanotube bundles.” The above experiments are referenced in a Patent issued August 28, 2018. US 10,059,595– Ultra High Strength Nanomaterials And Methods of Manufacture claims to use the above irradiation methods to manufacture tapes and fibers with 700 GPa Young’s modulus! Somebody beat them to it!
In 2008 it was found individual CNT shells have strengths of up to ≈100 gigapascals (150000 psi). Although the strength of individual CNT shells is extremely high weak shear interactions between adjacent shells and tubes lead to significant reduction in the effective strength of multi-walled carbon nanotubes and carbon nanotube bundles down to only a few GPa. This limitation has been recently addressed by applying high-energy electron irradiation which crosslinks inner shells and tubes” and effectively increases the strength of these materials to ≈60 GPa for multi-walled carbon nanotubes and ≈17 GPa for double-walled carbon nanotube bundles.””The above experiments are referenced in a Patent issued August 28″” 2018. US 1059″”595– Ultra High Strength Nanomaterials And Methods of Manufacture claims to use the above irradiation methods to manufacture tapes and fibers with 700 GPa Young’s modulus! Somebody beat them to it!”””””””
No, Young’s modulus is not a measure of strength.
In many cases it correlates with strength, but you can have a stiff material with low strength (such as a cracker biscuit) compared to a not stiff material with much greater strength (such as rubber).
Apply a small load to the same sized bit of rubber or cracker, the rubber will stretch and the cracker will not.
Apply a bit more load, the cracker will crack and crumble, the rubber will just stretch a bit more.
I’m not talking about Brexit. I’m talking about seasteading.
I’m not talking about Brexit. I’m talking about seasteading.
That’s true but Youngs modulus is one of the most important measures of a materials strength. Fiber glass-E and graphite reinforcing fibers are rated by their young’s moduli. The highest strength graphite fibers have 531 GPa Young’s (elastic) modulus.
The NASA design was not vague at all. It required seven Shuttle flights for an initial cable, which be used to haul up additional cable. Their projected cost was $15 billion. Google “Bradley Edwards space elevator” and you’ll find an 80-page report from the study. It covers a lot of practical details. Edwards also published a book, which you can find on Amazon.
The NASA design was not vague at all. It required seven Shuttle flights for an initial cable which be used to haul up additional cable. Their projected cost was $15 billion.Google Bradley Edwards space elevator”” and you’ll find an 80-page report from the study. It covers a lot of practical details. Edwards also published a book”””” which you can find on Amazon.”””
The current technology is basically a glorified bomb.
The current technology is basically a glorified bomb.
Minor correction: elongation (or in the technical terminology, strain) is the *change* in length divided by the original length. In other words: [new length – original length] / [original length].
To clarify a bit more material engineering, Young modulus is a measure of stiffness, which is a separate property from strength. Strength means how much load a material can take before breaking. Stiffness means how much load you need to apply to elastically stretch a material (elastic stretching means the material will revert back to its previous shape when you remove the load – vs plastic stretching, where the deformation remains).
More specifically, the Young modulus is the ratio between the applied load and the resulting elongation. The higher this ratio, the more force you need to apply to stretch the material (= stiffer). It affects bending and other forms of deformation in a similar way, but the equations are a bit different.
Elongation is a unit-less number (new length divided by original length), usually less than 0.1. That’s why the Young modulus has the same units as the strength, but is usually a much larger number.
For reference, the Young modulus of a single CNT is ~1000 GPa, similar to diamond. Steel is ~200.
For what? So that people theoretically could haul their *sses into orbit and back? Because no-one will take on the financial burden to build a space elevator.
For what? So that people theoretically could haul their *sses into orbit and back? Because no-one will take on the financial burden to build a space elevator.
“In 2008, it was found individual CNT shells have strengths of up to ≈100 gigapascals (15,000,000 psi). Although the strength of individual CNT shells is extremely high, weak shear interactions between adjacent shells and tubes lead to significant reduction in the effective strength of multi-walled carbon nanotubes and carbon nanotube bundles down to only a few GPa. This limitation has been recently addressed by applying high-energy electron irradiation, which crosslinks inner shells and tubes, and effectively increases the strength of these materials to ≈60 GPa for multi-walled carbon nanotubes and ≈17 GPa for double-walled carbon nanotube bundles.”
The above experiments are referenced in a Patent issued August 28, 2018. US 10,059,595– Ultra High Strength Nanomaterials And Methods of Manufacture claims to use the above irradiation methods to manufacture tapes and fibers with 700 GPa Young’s modulus! Somebody beat them to it!
Well the other option is the rotovator, which is a glorified slingshot throwing you to orbital velocity.
Well the other option is the rotovator which is a glorified slingshot throwing you to orbital velocity.
I’m not talking about Brexit. I’m talking about seasteading.
Sufficient” is a VERY vague term for that application. The space elevator can be done with existing materials, it just takes a cable with such an extreme taper that the total mass you have to put into orbit becomes millions and millions of tonnes. As the materials improve, the cost comes down. So “sufficient” is really a comment about the assumed money available, rather than a fundamental property of the materials.
Sufficient”” is a VERY vague term for that application.The space elevator can be done with existing materials”” it just takes a cable with such an extreme taper that the total mass you have to put into orbit becomes millions and millions of tonnes.As the materials improve”” the cost comes down. So “”””sufficient”””” is really a comment about the assumed money available”””” rather than a fundamental property of the materials.”””
For once this is a call for a Manhattan project that actually makes sense. The Manhattan project (and the Apollo project) was a project where 1. There was a clear end goal. 2. The basic science was all worked out, it was a matter of engineering a way to apply the science. 3. An expert in the field could sit down and just work out how to throw money (and very, very smart people) at the problem until it was solved. This was one of those times. Once nanotubes were discovered, enough brilliant people with enough resources were going to be able to solve the problem. So many times people call for a “Manhattan project” to solve stuff like a solar powered car or cure cancer or world peace or something where either the basic science isn’t there, or we don’t even know what basic science is even applicable.
For once this is a call for a Manhattan project that actually makes sense.The Manhattan project (and the Apollo project) was a project where1. There was a clear end goal.2. The basic science was all worked out it was a matter of engineering a way to apply the science.3. An expert in the field could sit down and just work out how to throw money (and very very smart people) at the problem until it was solved.This was one of those times. Once nanotubes were discovered enough brilliant people with enough resources were going to be able to solve the problem.So many times people call for a Manhattan project”” to solve stuff like a solar powered car or cure cancer or world peace or something where either the basic science isn’t there”””” or we don’t even know what basic science is even applicable.”””
Brexit is just a political thing. You don’t actually have to tow Britain away from Europe.
Brexit is just a political thing. You don’t actually have to tow Britain away from Europe.
The NASA design was not vague at all. It required seven Shuttle flights for an initial cable, which be used to haul up additional cable. Their projected cost was $15 billion.
Google “Bradley Edwards space elevator” and you’ll find an 80-page report from the study. It covers a lot of practical details. Edwards also published a book, which you can find on Amazon.
These superstrong nanotubes only have to be 2 to 3 miles long and maybe 6-9 GPa in strength for the application I have in mind. However, the manufacturing process has to be relatively cheap and ideally can be done on an ocean-going ship
These superstrong nanotubes only have to be 2 to 3 miles long and maybe 6-9 GPa in strength for the application I have in mind. However the manufacturing process has to be relatively cheap and ideally can be done on an ocean-going ship
The current technology is basically a glorified bomb.
It still sounds weird to have a glorified cable-car accelerating to orbital velocity.
It still sounds weird to have a glorified cable-car accelerating to orbital velocity.
The NASA study in the early 2000s said nanotube strands 7cm long, put together with a realistically strong epoxy, would be sufficient. I don’t know what strength they assumed.
The NASA study in the early 2000s said nanotube strands 7cm long put together with a realistically strong epoxy would be sufficient. I don’t know what strength they assumed.
For what? So that people theoretically could haul their *sses into orbit and back? Because no-one will take on the financial burden to build a space elevator.
I heard the bare minimum required for doing a space elevator are 50 GPa in very long strands (like thousands of km). These ones surpass that but in much shorter ones. Not sure they can build them long enough yet, but for many terrestrial applications, that’s revolutionary. Seems like industry has stopped or will soon stop laughing about the space elevator. But we are not there yet.
I heard the bare minimum required for doing a space elevator are 50 GPa in very long strands (like thousands of km). These ones surpass that but in much shorter ones. Not sure they can build them long enough yet but for many terrestrial applications that’s revolutionary.Seems like industry has stopped or will soon stop laughing about the space elevator. But we are not there yet.
We should have put a Manhattan-Project-style effort into this years ago. Now look who has the 80gpa nanofibers — CHINA.
We should have put a Manhattan-Project-style effort into this years ago.Now look who has the 80gpa nanofibers — CHINA.
Well the other option is the rotovator, which is a glorified slingshot throwing you to orbital velocity.
“Sufficient” is a VERY vague term for that application.
The space elevator can be done with existing materials, it just takes a cable with such an extreme taper that the total mass you have to put into orbit becomes millions and millions of tonnes.
As the materials improve, the cost comes down. So “sufficient” is really a comment about the assumed money available, rather than a fundamental property of the materials.
For once this is a call for a Manhattan project that actually makes sense.
The Manhattan project (and the Apollo project) was a project where
1. There was a clear end goal.
2. The basic science was all worked out, it was a matter of engineering a way to apply the science.
3. An expert in the field could sit down and just work out how to throw money (and very, very smart people) at the problem until it was solved.
This was one of those times. Once nanotubes were discovered, enough brilliant people with enough resources were going to be able to solve the problem.
So many times people call for a “Manhattan project” to solve stuff like a solar powered car or cure cancer or world peace or something where either the basic science isn’t there, or we don’t even know what basic science is even applicable.
Brexit is just a political thing. You don’t actually have to tow Britain away from Europe.
These superstrong nanotubes only have to be 2 to 3 miles long and maybe 6-9 GPa in strength for the application I have in mind. However, the manufacturing process has to be relatively cheap and ideally can be done on an ocean-going ship
It still sounds weird to have a glorified cable-car accelerating to orbital velocity.
The NASA study in the early 2000s said nanotube strands 7cm long, put together with a realistically strong epoxy, would be sufficient. I don’t know what strength they assumed.
I heard the bare minimum required for doing a space elevator are 50 GPa in very long strands (like thousands of km). These ones surpass that but in much shorter ones. Not sure they can build them long enough yet, but for many terrestrial applications, that’s revolutionary.
Seems like industry has stopped or will soon stop laughing about the space elevator. But we are not there yet.
We should have put a Manhattan-Project-style effort into this years ago.
Now look who has the 80gpa nanofibers — CHINA.