A Building Material 12 Times Stronger Than Steel

nm1m writes: "For the last few months I have been following with some interest a few stories (story link may not work) in the school newspaper about a new structural technology being developed at BYU. It is called PYRAmatrix, and is 12 times stronger than steel, yet less than 10 percent the weight of steel. A 47 foot cylinder of this stuff, 16 inches in diameter and weighing just 47 pounds, can support almost 4 tons. It seems to have obvious applications in aerospace, electricity utility poles, radar and communication towers, and just about any structure that needs exceptional strength. An interesting press release with facts and figures can be found here. Photos can be found here." The link worked for me -- and reminded me of the plastic-walking scene in Sabrina .

Comments

Material and structure

[heikkile]

To my untrained eye it seems like they have created a lattice pattern in some sort of polymer. Then they compare its behaviour to steel tubes. At least here in Denmark, most tall poles are already lattice structures, usually of steel. I wonder if this miracle material would perform well in a traditionally shaped lattice or if their new miraculous lattice would work even better with conventional steel?

press release?

[b_pretender]

The linked story seems more like a press release rather than a study of the material.

It leaves out important facts, such as...
...strength is not the only important material property. The images only show this strength in compression.

Is this material resiliant? Strong in tension or compression? Does it shear easily?

ALL of these properties matter if you are going to use it. Usually, the Aeromet steels, super carbon composites and other superstrong materials suffer from poor non-strength properties, rendering them useless in most situations.

Imagine your super material 2 lb bike frame that chips away because it is so brittle that rocks chip off peices, or is too rigid because the material has no elastic modulos.

Oh yeah, great pictures...

[Tom7]

These MS Paint jobs remind me of "all your base are belong to pyramatrix" or something...

Sweet.

[TweeKinDaBahx]

Now we can build 10,000 unit subdivisions in the desert at half the cost! Won't it be grand when we're all out of water?! I CAN'T WAIT!

(Yeah, this is a bit paranoid BTW, but I live in new mexico so give me a break. EL VADO LAKE is a mud hole and I didn't catch any fish this weekend so I'm bitter.)

Not What it's cracked up to be.

[katarn]

Okay, to summarize:

1. There is nothing new about Carbon Fiber. The supposedly 'original' thing here is NOT the material, it's the structural design.
2. People have been using triangles in structural designs for over 100 years. This looks like a cool demonstration of what some basic engineering principles can do with modern materials, but nothing truly new or patentable. This may make an interesting collage course, but the rest of the hype seems to be just B.S.
3. Yes, some of the pictures are poorly faked, but they are at least labeled as such.
4. Since this is nothing new, these material/ structure will have all the problems inherent with any carbon fiber structure. They will be prone to invisible stress fractures, breaking before bending, and be $$. Don't get me wrong, carbon fiber is great for some application. But it's generally best for applications where constant inspection and knowledgeable care can be continually provided. High performance hang gliders are made from carbon fiber. Personally my hang glider is good old aluminum. Much less $$$ and more forgiving of stupidity for us beginners. And a telephone pole, a power pole, or a street sign does not receive anywhere near the maintenance, inspection, and care as even a beginner's hang glider.
5. If you want to see something truly NEW done with carbon fiber, check this out. I must admit *I* would have never thought to make this item out of carbon fiber. And, incidently, I think THIS is where these folks should put their patents.