Nanotube Threads Get Stronger

pythorlh writes: "NewScientist has an article about carbon-nanotube thread. Could this be the begining of "monofilament" that sci-fi has been drooling over for years?" Well, from the sound of the article, not yet. But soon, perhaps: according to the article, "The new nanotube threads are about 10 times stronger than buckypaper, and can be tied into knots without breaking. But they are still much weaker than many other fibres, such as iron thread."

Comments

Potential?

[addaon]

How much potential do these threads have? We've all been dreaming of space elevators since Clark suggested the idea. Does any of the more recent research suggest that the currently-weak threads can ever be developed to such a point that a space elevator would be possible?

Re:Potential?

[Tofof]

The other use could be space tethers. This goal is probably sooner in the future, though the first test (Feb 25, '96) failed a few years ago. That test, though was designed to generate electricity - the tether had a copper braid around a simple nylon string, and was encased in kevlar. That one failed because air was trapped in the nylon, and the 3500 volts being generated changed the air to plasma (similar to a fluorescent tube lighting up) which subsequently melted the tether. This material would likely be far, far superior to the nylon.

Re:Potential?

[dimator]

I didnt know they tried this, do you have a link?


--

Re:Potential?

[glass_window]

Well in the medical feild there's a lot of potential. they would make good stiches, they wouldnt leave scars that look so nasty
i think i also remember somebody pointing out that theyd make a really good heatsink, in theory it sounds good
then theres the nanorobots growing ever more possible
im sure millions of them out there

Re:Potential?

[jasamaman]

How much potential do these threads have?
These threads, because of their engineering structure will be quite stong once they are perfected. They could, in theroy, be as strong, if not stronger, than iron and steel.

Re:Potential?

[NanoProf]

One can estimate theoretically the ultimate strength of a nanotube be examining the microscopic failure modes, i.e. the ways in which atoms rearrange in response to an external stress (i.e. stretching).

In the case of perfect, defect-free nanotubes, there are two modes that seem to be important. First, the rotation of a single carbon-carbon bond by 90 degrees, which converts a patch of 4 hexagons (remember that carbon atoms are arranged in a chicken-wire or honeycomb pattern on the tube wall) into two pentagons and two heptagons (relevant references are Zhang & Crespi from Penn State in Physical Review Letters and work by Bernholc at NC State and Yacobson at Rice I think, but the exact journal escapes me at the moment). This mode is a plastic distortion of the tube; the tube with the bonds rearranged is a bit longer than it was before.

The second failure mode is for one of the hexagonal rings of carbon atoms to break open, i.e. for a carbon-carbon bond to break. This is a more catastrophic event, in that the tube then quickly breaks near the point of failure. Which way a tube fails may actually depend on how the honeycomb pattern is rolled into a tube shape.

Now that's just the microscopic theory on the ideal, defect-free system. In a real tube, one expects there to be pre-existing defects in the structure. The failure under tension will then be at the defective points

But, since nanotubes are so small, it's plausible that a single tube or bunch of tubes might grow entirely defect-free, in which case one can access the ultimate theoretical failure strength. Experiments on trying to stretch and break single bundles of nanotubes (Lieber's group at Harvard) show that one can extend a nanotube by about 6% of it's length before it breaks. This is in good agreement with the theoretical predictions mentioned above (and it's a legit prediction- the theory came first!). So it appears that in small enough systems, one can attain the theoretical mechanical strength.

Now if one wants to make a space elevator, one's material has to also be resistant to radiation damage, etc. I think a back of the envelope estimate shows carbon nanotubes or diamond nanowires as being in the right ballpark, so long as one allows the structure to taper, but once one factors in the necessary engineering margins and the need to be resistant to damage over long periods (don't want it to fall apart in a year or two :-) it's much less clear if it's really possible. It's all in the very very long run, of course.

I should admit- I have not yet read this specific article (New Scientist website is crashing on me) so I can't comment specifically on this current experimental result. My guess is they did a larger-scale version of Lieber's experiment and found that the resulting thread was alot weaker (not surpirising- their structure likely has lots more defects and possibly single tubes don't extend throughout the entire length- they overlap).

Re:Potential?

[ErikZ]

Clark? I heard it first in
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/039482472 5/ref=sim_books/103-3932858-0304665

Called them skyhooks...

Later
Erik Z

Re:Potential?

[crhylove]

Who carez about space elevators? scientists @ nasa just levitated a bowling ball according 2 popular mechanics (i think april) using an electromagnetic wave that convinced matter that it's gravitational effect was less than what it in fact was. i want area 51 opened up NOW! and i want bush's brother 2 not b n charge of counting his brother's votes!

Heh heh heh

[Anonymous Coward]

I've got a strong nanotube for ya!

Re:Heh heh heh

[addaon]

I've got a strong nanotube for ya!

Umm.. good try at insinuating, but it really just makes you look... small.

Buckballs..... when?

[BenBenBen]

This must be about the fifth year ina row I've heard great things about buckyballs, and Carbon 60. But where is it going? I mean, after all this time and we still don't have a decent end product.

I appreciate that development takes time, but when can we, the general public, expect nanotubular bike tyres or Lego blocks {grin}?

And what exactly does this new technology offer us? Maybe I'm being paranoid, but if this tech had many serious uses it would've been classified up the wazoo by now. Correct me if I'm wrong, please.

Ben^3

Re:Buckballs..... when?

[HeghmoH]

Electricity was known a couple of thousand years ago, and nothing exciting happened with it until the 1800s. Have patience.

Re:Buckballs..... when?

[grue23]

I heard a claim from a 'famous scientist' that major inventions/discoveries take about 60 years to come into common use after they're invented. Anyone know where that one came from? The source was "Cosmic Trigger" by Robert Anton Wilson, but the scientist he was referring to was someone else. Anyways, electricity took about 60 years, wire/telephony took about that long, etc.

To answer the other bit, technologies, in almost all cases, can only be classified by the US government if they were developed with government funding. There may very well be export restrictions on the stuff though.

Re:Buckballs..... when?

[NanoProf]

Buckyballs don't have any important current application that I know of (there was some work in nonlinear optical materials, but I don't know if it panned out).

Carbon nanotubes have a pretty good chance of appearing as field emitters in flat-panel displays before too long. They have great conductivity, they're very pointy and extremely robust under the relevant electrical conditions. They are already at the simple prototype stage. Batteries might also pan out (they store lithium quite well) but tubes are still much too expensive for that.

The tubes will very likely find many more commercial applications than buckyballs.

Oh- and there's one application out there right now. Mass-produced (and very low-quality) multiwalled tubes are currently sold to mix into plastic parts to add conductivity to the plastic so that they can be charged up uniformly and electrostatically painted. Nice shiny plastic car bumpers. Not quite an elevator to geosynchronous, but it makes (a little) money.

Re:Buckballs..... when?

[Gilthalas]

I use to work with nanotubes, ao I'll throw in my 2 cents. Nanotubes are still very much in their infancy (only about 10 years old) and research is just now getting to coming up with production techniques that produce decent yields. Unfortunately, there is no current way to choose the style (i.e. chirality) of tube, so it's impossible to get all conducting tubes, for example. We're sorta stuck without that capability, but things are starting to look up. Fortunately, lots of research money is being put into nanotubes each year, and the scientific community still sees them as a very viable material in the near future (for exactly what or when is still unclear). Lots of good work is going on at UNC-CH for those of you that are interested. -Gilthalas

Re:Buckballs..... when?

[nomadic]

Might have actually been Buckminster Fuller himself. I know he didn't expect his inventions to come into use right away, but had a timeline which was often decades long before he expected them to be used.
--

Re:Buckballs..... when?

[esonik]

I heard that Carbon nanotubes were used as tips for AFM (atomic force microscope) and STM (scanning tunneling microscope). The advantage over conventional tips would be better knowledge of the atomic structure of the tip (important for the analysis of the pictures).

Uses

[Christ-0-Geek]

The uses of such material seem really quite incredible. Just think - outside the field of computing, these things could be used to reenforce bone material, or muscle tissue.

It seems that these might actually have a use, unlike the buckyballs mentioned, which don't seem to be doing much of, well, anything (or, am I wrong? If anyone has info on actual uses of C60, please enlighten me).

My estimate is that nanoscience will become actually useful and commonplace within 13 years... I hope :)


-CoG

"And with HIS stripes we are healed"

Re:Uses

[glass_window]

im pretty sure buckyballs are good as a lubricant, kinda like graphite also i heard something about it being really explosive if you trap an oxygen molecule inside the thing

Re:Uses

[evanfarrar]

yeah that 'explosive' bit you heard is crap, it was by a /.er, c60 is extremely stable, unlike molecules with bonding capadilities (oxygen, hydrocarbons)
______

Sky chair

[genkael]

Wow! With these things I could have rope attached to my sky chair that wouldn't break. And I could mud for hours.

Monofilaments in Warhammer 40K

[SuuSt]

We're one step closer to having that oh-so-nasty monofilament gun one of the Harelquins had in Warhammer 40K.

It shot out a spinning web of monofilament fibers that would turn its target into, as the book put in, something the approximate consistency of soup.

Re:Monofilaments in Warhammer 40K

[lastninja]

yeah but there is a one in six chance of missing, any soldier knows that that just won't cut it.

Re:Monofilaments in Warhammer 40K

[CakerX]

hah, I would rather see metla-guns personally, specificly the multi-melta. Which pretty much roasts victims inside out (its a portable microwave gun). and so thats what has been eating my Marine army all theese years...damn eldar

Re:Monofilaments in Warhammer 40K

[nekid_singularity]

my favorite fictional gun has always been the Needler, from the MechWarrior universe. I mean, the name itself is intimidating. It was supposed to work by shredding a block of material and fireing the pieces. OUCH. But the flechete gun from Hyperion was really cool, too.

Re:Monofilaments in Warhammer 40K

[CU-Ballistic]

Flechettes...interesting. I witnessed a flechette hand grenade exploding in real life. Quite a harrowing experience. The ROTC group here set up some wood scraps as 'targets' and threw the grenade in the middle. The wood was completely shredded. I could only imagine those tiny shards of metal ripping through flesh and bone, rendering a human into a soft pile of blood and guts. Scary.
-

Re:Monofilaments in Warhammer 40K

[perlyking]

Hm, long time since i've played warhammer 40k. I assume this is a "death spinner" but I seem to remember a weapon that was more like a bayonet pushed into the enemy which then behaved like a monofilament garden strimmer inside the enemies body.... fun fun fun.
I miss playing 40k :-(

Re:Monofilaments in Warhammer 40K

[nekid_singularity]

Actually, a flechette is a nail with fins. They are so light that they must achieve velocities of 10000ft/s. If you want a nasty waepon, the military has a artillery shell that contains 70,000 of these little nasty bastards. One can take out several thousands of troops with one of these.

Re:Monofilaments in Warhammer 40K

[LiRM35]

That would be the "Harlequin's Kiss." Citadel Journal recently released an updated version of the Harlequin's army list.

high fashion

[Juliet]

is this where high fashion, technology, and practicality meet?!

i have a feeling new strong high tech fibers will be used for safety, practicality and bondage.. before they start making dresses using it..

Re:high fashion

[Mignon]

new strong high tech fibers will be used for safety, practicality and bondage

This sounds like just the material I need to keep my Buckyballs safe and warm!

Nanotube clothes?

[FaxiS]

Could these nanotubes be made to wear? What's the length limit?

Re:Nanotube clothes?

[evanfarrar]

the length limit is i believe a millimeter, which is an unbelievable l/w ratio (1000/1)
______

Re:Nanotube clothes?

[Tycho]

Well with that sort of l/w ratio I would be worried about inhaling these fibers now in an occupational setting. An example of a occupational setting would be a very poorly designed manufacturing plant. The danger would be sort of like inhaling asbestos fibers. It really depends though if the fibers are flexible and not very sharp like serpentine asbestos. The fibers would be caught in the throat and either swallowed or coughed out (either way you win).

Otherwise if these fibers are small enough and inflexible enough they can get into your lungs and tear up lung tissue making scar tissue and eventually causing lung cancer. Even if this was a concern don't smoke and you would still probably be in fine shape. In any case even if these tubes were carcinogenic you would only really would have to be working in a poorly ventilated manufacturing plant.

Get yer thinggy out of the nanotube

[MasterOfDisaster]

This is yet another great advance in nanotechnolegy. but I'd like to point out that the use for something like this is not to put stuff through it, but to use it as well, rrealy, realy, realy, realy, realy, realy tiny threads

One day, hopefuly not too long from now, this kinda think will have a mainstream use (bullet proof cloth, space teathers, any other thing used to hook two objects together and not break)

Re:Get yer thinggy out of the nanotube

[NecrosisLabs]

One possible use for buckytubes that is being tossed about does use "putting stuff through it;" fuel cells. H storage is either large (balloon) or dense (compressed or liquid), each of these has drawbacks. A very long nanotube tank, (think steam engine tubing) would allow H atoms to be threaded through, thus allowing compact, yet isolated storage.

Re:Get yer thinggy out of the nanotube

[HiThere]

Is the bonding close enough to prevent H2 from penetrating? If so, this could be quite interesting. Esp. if there were some way, besides an open end, to get the stuff out! mono-H might escape, even if H2 wouldn't, but how could one create it at a reasonable cost? (And inside the tube!)
Caution: Now approaching the (technological) singularity.

Busted link?

[sbeitzel]

Exception in article: ns9999184 : org.xml.sax.SAXException: FWK005 parse may not be called while parsing.

TSS-1r results aren't what you claim

[Tau Zero]

Trapped air wouldn't have affected the insulating value (there is at least as much trapped air in nylon used dirtside). Instead the problem appears to have been some kind of puncture or porosity. Here is the press release on the report issued on the tether-break analysis. The most important paragraph:

The board found sufficient evidence to identify two possible causes of the breach in the insulation -- foreign object damage, or a defect in the tether itself. Debris and contamination found in the deployer mechanisms and in the tether itself could have been pushed into the insulation layer while the tether was still wound on its reel. The investigation found evidence of damage to copper wire in the tether, and also established that normal forces on the tether while on the reel could push a single copper strand or foreign debris through the insulation.

NASA's not that hard to search, you should go consult it more often.
--

Re:TSS-1r results aren't what you claim

[Tofof]

Also on Nasa's page will you find this article, written in 1999 rather than 1996, which is from where I took my information.

The culprit turned out to be the innermost core, made of a porous material which, during its manufacture, trapped many bubbles of air, at atmospheric pressure. Later vacuum-chamber experiments suggested that the unwinding of the reel uncovered pinholes in the insulation. That in itself would not have caused a major problem, because the ionosphere around the tether, under normal circumstance, was too rarefied to divert much of the current. However, the air trapped in the insulation changed that. As it bubbled out of the pinholes, the high voltage ("electric pressure") of the nearby tether, about 3500 volts, converted it into a plasma (in a way similar to the ignition of a fluorescent tube), a relatively dense one and therefore a much better conductor of electricity. The instruments aboard the tether satelite showed that this plasma diverted through the pinhole about 1 ampere, a current comparable to that of a 100-watt bulb (but at 3500 volts!), to the metal of the shuttle and from there to the ionospheric return circuit. That current was enough to melt the cable.

Remember, when it comes to science, the first conclusion drawn after the fact is not always the best.

Wierd...

[s390]

WTF? Clicking on the linked page finds:

Exception in article: ns9999184 : org.xml.sax.SAXException: FWK005 parse may not be called while parsing.

I'm using Netscape 4.61 (OS/2). Maybe I'll reboot into Linux Mandrake 7.0 and try it using Netscape 4.73 (IIRC).

Re:Wierd...

[n3m6]

got the same message with IE 5.5 ..
it could be a server error...
or maybe.. the slashdot effect..
damn..
bastards killed em again


"The world is coming to an end. Please log orff."

Re:Wierd...

[jhines]

I get the same thing off their front page, so they appear to be slashdotted.

Re:Wierd...

[the real jeezus]

Exception in article: ns9999184 : org.xml.sax.SAXException: FWK005 parse may not be called while parsing.

that's the problem!


In 1999, marijuana killed 0 Americans...

Re:yeah

[evanfarrar]

oh come on this conversation is hillarious!!! i hate it when i run outta mod points. trolls are my yatch
______

What's the alternative?

[2nd Post!]

What does this *research* offer us, you mean?

What was the point in researching electricity, 200 years ago? Nothing useful was built of it... for almost 200 years.

Yet if that research were not done, we would not have, in the intervening years, radio, speakers, solenoids, TVs, CPUs, etc.

So what will we have from C60 and buckyball research? No one knows... and that's all that can be said.

Do you want speculation? How about a different class of material? In one state superconducting, in another insulative, and in another, conducting? Different strength and material properties, maybe? How about a new class of allows using C60 instead of straight carbon? Or new optical devices using crystals doped with C60? It's sci fi, for now.

The nick is a joke! Really!

Re:What's the alternative?

[Anonymous Coward]

There was an article just last month with a practical application for C60. They made a transistor out of it. All of the information on the Internet fitting into a component the size of a sugercube (kinda hard to swallow).

We just need to be able to produce C60 and its spinoffs cheaply.

from "Dune"

[2Bits]

So, that nanotube thread is supposed to be plugged into the pore of my skin and collect the sweat and recycle it?

I don't want to know the taste of the recycled water....

monofilament in SF books

[grue23]

out of curiosity does anyone know the first instance of monofilament weaponry in science fiction books? i remember one from 'neuromancer', and i believe there was a monofilament climbing tool used in one of 'the stainless steel rat' books.

Re:monofilament in SF books

[AltGrendel]

I think Larry Niven wins that one, he mentions them in his universe early on, before his "Ringworld" book(s).

Re:monofilament in SF books

[cindy]

John Brunner? I think in one of his books from the late 60's or early 70's. Maybe The Sheep Look Up?

Re:monofilament in SF books

[tesserae]

I thought it was Stand on Zanzibar -- the scene where the young recruit gets beheaded when the ecoterrorists string a monofilament line across the train tracks.

But it's been a while...

---

Re:Potential? - it may take a while

[evanfarrar]

why is there still talk about the uni-tether? nanotubes don't get over a milli-. which is pretty damn long. but.... you can't get these mile long molecules b/c of the process: a currecncy is passed between two graphite rods- carbon vaporizes and then re-freezes into these wonderful spherical and pill shapes. it would take a hell of a lot of current and temperatures very close to carbon's boiling point for these long structures to happen
(why don't we just use nanobots! oh wait)
______

Very Cheap Space Access!

[cosmosis]

This material in large quantities makes possible Arthur C Clarke's BeanStalk to Geosynchyronous orbit. Want to get to space? Ride an elevator!

If...

[WolfWithoutAClause]

these buckeytubes were as strong as they potentially could be, then unfortunately the space elevator is probably economically impossible for quite some time.

Space elevators are 38 THOUSAND kilometers long. The material would have to come from the moon or asteroids, getting even a few hundred of tonnes of material from either is maybe 10 years away; never mind the 10s of thousands of tonnes needed. Then there's the factory. Then there's the fuel needed to move stuff to GEO orbit. etc. etc.

In the shorter term though, we're talking stronger bridges, skyscrapers, stronger carbon fiber materials etc. etc. Even lighter (hence better) space vehicles. Cool tech. Want some.

Re:If...

[Windwalker99]

Let's not forget that even after we've solved the problems associated with manufacturing, and the logistics involved in transporting the materials, we still have to come up with some means of preventing sabotage. We don't want to [attempt to] live through the effects of a 20k+ km cable wrapping around the earth, because somebody smuggled a suitcase nuke on board and cut the anchor free.

Re:If...

[WolfWithoutAClause]

To be honest, if someone's got a suitcase nuke, I'd prefer them to take out a tether than use it on the earth!

The cable wouldn't wrap around the earth- it would burn up as it re-enters. You wouldn't want to be in the few hundred miles east of the cable, but other than that its not a problem that can't be dealt with.

So the idea is that the cable would be built on an east coast and other design features would ensure cable wouldn't reach the earths surface after a catastrophic failure.

Re:/. SysAdmins meet Mister Wizard

[NanoProf]

Hi,

I am a slashdotter myself occasionally. I am also currently performing research on nanotubes at a major research unversity, with publications in Science, Nature, and other places on nanoscience.

Perhaps the slashdot readership is a bit more diverse than you though. I find it an interesting place to visit, with some very intelligent conversation. (And thanks much to the moderators).

Monofilament

[ptbrown]

We already have monofilament threads, most fishing line is described as such. What everyone here is thinking of is monomolecular filaments.

Re:Monofilament

[Deosyne]

Damn you! And here I thought that I could finally get to space with enough dental floss! Bastard...

Deo

It's fool-proof, but is it genius-proof?

[jamesc]

Let's not forget that even after we've solved the problems associated with manufacturing, and the logistics involved in transporting the materials, we still have to come up with some means of preventing sabotage. We don't want to [attempt to] live through the effects of a 20k+ km cable wrapping around the earth, because somebody smuggled a suitcase nuke on board and cut the anchor free.

Hmmm.... That would be bad juju for sure, but I wonder which would cause more deaths:

1. Using the suitcase nuke to cut a skyhook, part of which may come down at near orbital velocities along the equator; some hits at sub-orbital speeds, and the rest stays in orbit.
2. Detonating the bomb at the top of the World Trade Center and trying for an airburst + fire storm.

--

You already do...

[maveric149]

All water is recycled -- it's just that most of the time we are not aware of the process. The atoms in the water you drank today are well over 5 billion years old. In fact, there is a small chance, that some of the same molecules of water you consumed today, once passed through the digestive tract of a Late Cretaceous Period dinosaur (H2O molecules much older than that, almost surely would have been split by some photosynthesizing plant, alga, or cyanobacterium). The only difference between artificially purified water, and more naturally purified water, is psychological.

Not Clarke

[Zilch]

It was some Russian I think. Clarke borrowed the idea and turned it into a novel. Clarke (sp?) is a bright guy, but he seems to get a lot of credit he doesn't deserve. (Damn, now I have posted I have lost moderator access!) Zilch

link problem

[liahim]

Is it me or the site is crashing every time with:
"Exception in article: ns9999184 : org.xml.sax.SAXException: FWK005 parse may not be called while parsing." ?

Somebody is not processing exceptions the right way..

Any mirrors?

[dagar]

Does anyone have a copy of this article mirrored someplace? I tried to go to the link and it came back with an error.

Nanotubes

[Life Blood]

Just a few problems with these nanotubes.

1) Assuming perfectly defect free nanotubes above the single fiber level is implausible. Nanotubes work fine as single fibers, however stringing them together requires either using them in some sort of fiber composite or somehow connecting the tubes together to form some sort of tube honeycomb. A honeycomb cannot be assume to be defect free so properties will be degraded and a composite will weight the fiber properties with the weaker but tougher matrix.

2) Nanotubes will likely be quite brittle no matter what form they take. This poses big problems. The usual method for overcoming this is by compositing them with a weaker but tougher matrix, but that will lower the end strength of the composite.

3) Construction of tall buildings and the like requires big compressive loads. Tube/fiber composites suck in compression because the fibers buckle before they ever even get close to their ultimate strength. This is a problem if you wish to build a space elevator since such a structure is bound to have huge compressive loads at its base.

Article in Scientific American

[darthpenguin]

Just to let you all know, the current issue of Scientific American (December 2000) has an article about nanotubes. I was unable to find it on their web site, but it is on page 62 in the actual magazine


-MSD.dyndns.org
"Sucks to your ass-mar"

Nanotubes/fibres - other uses

[nonoriginal]

These constructs actually have significant other uses. One of the most notable is their potential to compress very diffuse gases (such as hydrogen) without the need for any sort of cryogenic or pressurized system. Essentially the nanofibres attract the gas molecules to reduce their natural diffusion under normal pressure and temperature conditions.

This has little to do with strength of such materials, but it does help to display their other uses. Don't write the stuff off.

Re:Nanotubes -space elevator

[andrewmuck]

A space elevator is not under compression, it dangles down and ideally has almost no load at the base (anchor point). cya, Andrew...