Slashdot Mirror


Nokia Developing Diamond-Like Gadget Casing

space_pingu writes "In the future, all gadgets could be coated with tough, diamond-like material. A patent from Nokia — featured in the latest patent round-up from New Scientist — describes a way of infusing plastic cases with a material, structurally similar to diamond, made from coal. Not only is it more scratch and grime-resistant, but it's also cheap and biodegradable. Apparently it also shines like a metal. The article also touches on a technique for welding with 'ice bullets', and an airport scanner that protects the dignity of travelers."

27 of 122 comments (clear)

  1. if you drive a late model car... by gp310ad · · Score: 3, Interesting

    you already own a gadget made with DLCs.

    --
    Do not look into LASER with remaining eye!
    1. Re:if you drive a late model car... by tinkerghost · · Score: 5, Informative

      When I was working at a company doing rotary press holograms, we were working on doing coatings of TiO2 using crystal growth. Our rough estimates were double the scratch resistance of an acrylic coating. Fun mixture - Titinate/Titinol acid inhibited/water catalized reaction occuring in an anhydrous methanol solution printed onto a film. All the benefits of glass vapor deposition (refractive index/scratchresistance) at about $0.05/1000SI as opposed to $1/1000SI.

      While it might be good for the scratch resistance, I do have to wonder what this is going to add to the cost - it might just be cheaper to use a more durable plastic instead of cheap plastic w/ coating.

    2. Re:if you drive a late model car... by guy-in-corner · · Score: 5, Funny
      Fun mixture - Titinate/Titinol acid inhibited/water catalized reaction occuring in an anhydrous methanol solution printed onto a film. All the benefits of glass vapor deposition (refractive index/scratchresistance) at about $0.05/1000SI as opposed to $1/1000SI.

      "Blah Rover blah blah blah food."

      With apologies to Gary Larson, and also to tinkerghost.

  2. *yawn* by Control+Group · · Score: 4, Funny

    Call me when I can get a skull gun.

    Or leverage my dry wit, stiff upper lip, and giant mustache to join the Vickies.

    --

    Reality has a conservative bias: it conserves mass, energy, momentum...
    1. Re:*yawn* by PalmKiller · · Score: 3, Funny

      You can't say what it really is or the diamond cartel will invite you to swim with da fishes.

    2. Re:*yawn* by somersault · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hot damn! I'm going to Seaworld!

      --
      which is totally what she said
    3. Re:*yawn* by SwimsWithTheFishes · · Score: 2, Funny

      Why did you summon me?

      --
      *click**beep**beep* Scotty, One to Mod up!
  3. Doh by rorre · · Score: 5, Funny

    If it's so tough, it will scratch everything else.

    1. Re:Doh by Hogwash+McFly · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Could God create a diamond casing that is so tough that it scratches even itself?

      --
      Mother, do you think they'll like this sig?
  4. Impractical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    and an airport scanner that protects the dignity of travelers

    Traveler dignity is not good for security theater.

  5. Re:hmm by Silver+Sloth · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Isn't strong and biodegradable mutually exclusive? Try oak wood.
    --
    init 11 - for when you need that edge.
  6. Welcome by Malshew · · Score: 5, Funny

    Welcome to the future. Everything is shiny here.

  7. X-Ray every passenger? by Wilson_6500 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I can understand that at this point they are probably just filing patents "just in case." However, taking radiographs of every air passenger is not what I would call a responsible use of ionizing radiation.

    Before anyone starts quoting dose limits at me, I'm going to say right now that exposure to ionizing radiation should be kept as low as is feasible to do. This means that you _avoid_ unnecessary radiographs and similar procedures, not throw them up for every air passenger--not at the doses imparted by modern radiographs. I also can't understand how they can support such a system when some folks fly dozens of times a year or many more and will have no practical way to track the number of radiographs they've had taken so far this year etc. etc. Can you imagine a very frequent flyer being turned away from security because he'd been put through the scanner too many times this year? Of course you can't--that would never happen because nobody is keeping track.

    Unless backscatter x-ray requires far, far less entrance exposure than standard radiography (which I suppose it would since it doesn't need to penetrate the body) to the point where it's into background or only somewhat above, it's very hard to not be a little worried by this. Of course, if they plan on visualizing both sides of the body at once, then naturally they will have to penetrate the body. Then you have the issues of people being told to "go through again" because of machine glitches, because someone was looking at the bag scanner instead, etc.

    What really worries me is that nobody seems to even be talking about this. That either means that the doses from these radiographs really are that much lower (and I just don't know it), or that nobody is really concerned by it (which is a scary thought, meaning as it does that our "security" obsession is starting to physically do harm to people).

    1. Re:X-Ray every passenger? by ISoldMyLowIdOnEbay · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I suspect you'd get a bigger dose sitting in the plane once it gets to high altitude...

    2. Re:X-Ray every passenger? by Wilson_6500 · · Score: 4, Informative

      I don't know much about flight doses. However, this calculator gave me a dose equivalent on the order of 10 microSv for an hour-long flight. For a ten-hour flight, it gives less than 1 mSv. PA chest radiographs give dose equivalents on the order of 10 microSv (at about 100 kVp or so), if I'm not mistaken--I think that's on the right order.

      We can say that it seems that this scan (assuming it "behaves" dose-wise just like a PA chest radiograph) just adds a dose of about an extra hour of flight-time. Of course, since we're not provided any of the dose profile information ourself (if they use lower energy x-rays the dose goes up a bit) there's no way for us to really be sure. We can sit here and approximate and hand-wave all we'd like, but as a medical physics student I haven't heard a word about these machines or their potential health effects OR about any regulations for these machines. Now, I can't expect to hear everything about every new radiographic device, but I consider this a pretty important advancement in the field, and I never hear anyone discussing putting health physicists in airports to monitor these machines. Considering how closely watched and regulated are medical radiographic instruments, it seems that these machines should be subject to similar close monitoring--which is probably not feasible in an airport-security environment.

  8. Airport Scanner by TheJasper · · Score: 5, Funny

    The security guard can click on any suspicious objects to remove the distortion and enlarge that area for a closer look. So this scanner is meant to protect the dignity of passengers how? Seems like it protects security from passengers they *dont* want to see naked. Any good looking passenger will obviously have something suspicious in their underwear. After all, you have to make sure those bulges aren't concealing any dangerous liquids. For that matter, aren't breast implant illegal hidden carriers of liquids? Could be dangerous. Think of your own scenarios for female guards, I don't go that way.
  9. Re:How about Tenifer? by somersault · · Score: 3, Informative

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenifer

    "Glock, an Austrian firearms manufacturer, utilizes this process to protect the slides of the pistols they manufacture. The Tenifer finish on a Glock is the third and final hardening process. It is 0.05 millimeters thick and produces a patented 64 Rockwell C (diamond cone) hardness rating via a 500 C nitride bath. The final matte, non-glare finish meets or exceeds stainless steel specifications, is 85% more corrosion resistant than a hard chrome finish, and is 99.9% salt-water corrosion resistant. After the Tenifer process, a black Parkerized finish is applied and the slide is protected even if the finish were to wear off. Several other pistols also use this process including the Walther P99 and Steyr M/S series."

    This stuff is different, because it isn't a nitriding process, it's a diamond coating process. You get loads of coatings for engineering purposes, a few I've heard of at work are deep gas nitriding, armoloy, diamond-like-coating, tungsten carbide coatings, etc

    --
    which is totally what she said
  10. Strong != hard by Flying+pig · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Any very large real diamond will have flaws in its crystal structure which will cause it to shatter if hit in the right way. (The idea that you can hit a small diamond with a sledgehammer and it will bounce off is pure fantasy.) Oak is a truly remarkable composite material which, like all successful composites, has harder materials (quartz for instance) and soft materials in the matrix. It is a very strong material for its weight and can absorb large amounts of energy, both in bending and impact. Looking for a bedplate material recently for a heavy vibrating system, I couldn't find anything better, in terms of performance and price, than European oak supported by steel beams. If I had been able to replace the oak beams with diamond, I rather think the vibration would shatter it along the fault planes in no time.

    On the other hand, if you know a way to make cheap diamonds a metre long by 10cm square as one perfect crystal, at a price under $100, I'd like to be your European sales agent.

    --
    Pining for the fjords
    1. Re:Strong != hard by ivan256 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Oak is great and all, but I wouldn't want to keep it in a moist place for very long. At least not without some coating on it (which presumably would defeat the purpose). Additionally, oak is not very scratch resistant.

      It is a very strong material for its weight and can absorb large amounts of energy, both in bending and impact. Looking for a bedplate material recently for a heavy vibrating system, I couldn't find anything better, in terms of performance and price, than European oak supported by steel beams.

      Fir is stiffer and considerably cheaper. It is also generally available in much longer lengths than oak.

      On the other hand, if you know a way to make cheap diamonds a metre long by 10cm square as one perfect crystal, at a price under $100, I'd like to be your European sales agent.

      How thick does it have to be? If you only need a few microns, then no problem.

    2. Re:Strong != hard by ColdWetDog · · Score: 3, Informative
      Oak is great and all, but I wouldn't want to keep it in a moist place for very long. At least not without some coating on it (which presumably would defeat the purpose). Additionally, oak is not very scratch resistant.

      You know, they used to make ships out of oak. The old Royal Navy and all that.... "Hearts of Oak". Yes, they were clad with copper at the waterline but that was to keep the Toredo (sp?) worms from chewing up hull. Pretty water resistant. And natural - can't forget that. No nasty nano this and nano that.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  11. Re:Hard - not tough. by amliebsch · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is not a good thing.

    Why? The vast majority of people want to replace their technology products after a relatively short period of time whether they are broken or not. If your technology device is over-deisgned and over-engineered to last longer than you want it, you are not getting the best value for your dollar.

    Ultra-reliable and ultra-durable devices do exist, mostly for military or industrial customers. Most people, though, would never pay the prices that those products demand.

    --
    If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
  12. Re:hmm by Thansal · · Score: 2, Interesting

    the other question is of course:
    So what?

    Ok, so some how it is biodegradable, but the rest of the product still is made of plastic/metal, and those, afaik, are still NOT biodegradable.

    Oh, and I am with you on wondering how it is both ultra strong AND biodegradable. After all, are diamonds biodegradable? Some one else said bones, last I checked bones last a VERY long time, sure they are biodegradable, but it will take many years to do so....

    oh well, I dont' get it.

    guess I should do some more research.

    --
    Do Or Do Not, There Is No Spoon, There Is Only Zuul. Everything in the above post is probably opinion.
  13. Re:Diamondfinger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Don't know... "Diamondfinger" sounds a lot more like the name of a person who makes prostate exams.

  14. Re:hmm by maxume · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Oak is no where near as hard as diamond. You can still smash a diamond, etc, hardness is hardness not strength. For example, wood has absurd tensile strength, something that crystal structures often lack, unless they are more or less perfect.

    --
    Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
  15. Why ask Slashdot when you can ask Wikipedia? by p3d0 · · Score: 3, Informative
    If it's made from coal, then it's pure carbon. And if carbon is arranged into a tough state, isn't that diamond by definition?
    Uh, no. To learn about allotropes of carbon, you can start here rather than asking us.
    --
    Patrick Doyle
    I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
  16. re: not a good thing? by King_TJ · · Score: 2, Informative

    I disagree. If you can make a gadget more durable without adding too much to the price, that's a win-win situation. Even if you only want to use the item for a year or two before upgrading to something else, you're probably going to either resell it, or hand it down to somebody else who can make use of it, right? That is, unless it's so beat up that nobody wants it anymore, or it quit working completely and became trash.

    Instead of your purchase becoming garbage just because the casing is all cracked/damaged, you'll have a much better chance of recouping a little resale value out of it if it's built more durably.

  17. Re:parent WILL be modded up by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...rotary press holograms...TiO2 using crystal growth...anhydrous methanol solution ...glass vapor deposition I can almost guarantee that you'll be modded up. We like holograms and big words here on Slashdot.