Bullet-Proof Sheets of Carbon Nanotubes

An anonymous reader notes a CNN.com report on Nanocomp Technologies, the first in the world to make sheets of carbon nanotubes. "In April, [CEO] Lashmore had a mechanical multicaliber gun shoot bullets at different versions of his sheet, each less than a fifth of an inch thick. ... Army tests show the material works as well as Kevlar. The military also hopes to replace copper wiring in planes and satellites with highly conductive nanotubes, saving millions of dollars in fuel costs."

Comments

Escalation

[Bruce Perens]

If artillery has problems getting through carbon nanotubes, oxyaluminum nitride, and spinel, how long until the artillery itself is made of those materials?

Re:Escalation

[Kentaree]

That's an interesting question, but doesn't it apply to kevlar too? We've had kevlar vests for years, but no ammunition made of kevlar that I've heard of. Maybe the material isn't suitable to be shot out at high speeds/pressures?

Re:Escalation

[Shakrai]

TFA doesn't say that it will stop artillery. It says they fired a "mechanical multicaliber gun" at 1,400 feet per second. It doesn't say what calibers or bullet weights they were using but the speed of 1,400 fps suggests that they are testing it against handgun equivalents. There are many off the shelf rifle calibers that will easily achieve twice that velocity. It would be interesting to see if this material is proof against them or if it's only useful against handguns.

Re:Escalation

[Anonymous Coward]

About as long as it's taking them to make bullets out of kevlar I'd guess.

There's a price performance ratio here. If you can afford to send your troops into battle with 10,000 rounds of cheap ass led or 100 rounds of "super bullet X", I can bet that your squad is going to opt for the 10,000 rounds. Besides the impact of something hitting you at 1,400 ft/sec is going to take you out of combat just as quick if it travels through your chest, or just breaks all your ribs.

Actually the guy with the broken ribs requires the second soldier to drag him away, which means two less guns shooting back at you.

Re:Escalation

[MancunianMaskMan]

Artillery projectiles need to be heavy, not hard. Lead is good, depleted uranium is better. Not obvious where carbon NT can improve that.

Re:Escalation

[loupgarou21]

There is already plenty of artillery that can penetrate armor. I'm guessing that since the article mentioned that the carbon nanotube sheets provide the same level of protection as kevlar, it probably does no better against a bullet with a depleted uranium core than kevlar does.

Re:Escalation

[Nadaka]

Kevlar and carbon nano-tubes are not particularly dense. The ideal projectile material is extremely dense, its why lead and depleted uranium are often used instead (or in conjunction with) of hard brass or steel.

Re:Escalation

[Wolvenhaven]

People also used leather as armor, but so far no one has dug up a leather sword. The physical properties of kevlar as used for armor are entirely different from the physical properties of a good bullet. Kevlar has very high tensile strength allowing it to spread the impact over a large area by deforming and pulling on all the threads around it. With a bullet, you want all the force located in one small, strong, pointy area for penetration; which is why armor penetrating rounds are jacketed or tipped in a metal much stronger than lead or copper(steel, tungsten, depleted uranium).

Re:Escalation

[clone53421]

you want all the force located in one small, strong, pointy area for penetration; which is why armor penetrating rounds are jacketed or tipped in a metal much stronger than lead or copper(steel, tungsten, depleted uranium).

Actually, the advantage of DU isn't its strength but its density:

Depleted uranium is very dense; at 19050 kg/m^3, it is 1.67 times as dense as lead, only slightly less dense than tungsten and gold, and 84% as dense as osmium or iridium, which are the densest known substances under standard (i.e., Earth-surface) pressures. Thus a given mass of it has a smaller diameter than an equivalent lead projectile, with less aerodynamic drag and deeper penetration due to a higher pressure at point of impact.

Re:Escalation

[Tekfactory]

Hey Bruce...

Lightweight and hard (not necessarily strong) are not necessarily what you want in a bullet. Hard bullets destroy the rifling in the weapon. There are smoothbore guns, but not too many. Lightweight bullets don't retain their energy well over time.

The trend in artillery is for really heavy rounds, like Depleted Uranium or thin Tugsten spikes launched inside of a Sabot. If anything came from this in a prjectile I assume it would come from the Silver Bullet style like the high speed tugsten spike.

Re:Escalation

[FCAdcock]

>>People also used leather as armor, but so far no one has dug up a leather sword.

Um, I'm pretty sure that would be called a whip. And yes, we dig those up all the time. Some people still use them in fact...

A leather whip can do just as much damage as a sword. It may not be as sharp, but the tip of a whip is the fastest thing short of a fighter jet.

Re:Escalation

[Shakrai]

but the tip of a whip is the fastest thing short of a fighter jet.

Or a bullet. Or a photon. Or the speed with which you will roll your eyes at my corrections ;)

Re:Escalation

[johndiii]

A few years back, the trend in armor-piercing rounds was the teflon-coated brass round. They are now banned, though not for the Teflon coating (which wears off in the barrel or peels away in flight), but because of the hard cores.

Re:Escalation

[thebheffect]

I missed that lesson in history class. The one where the Roman Legions are beset by the whip-wielding Visigoth horde. On a side note, I'm pretty sure whips are only effective against Dracula and Nazis.

Re:Escalation

[Publikwerks]

I have a leather sword...

Re:Escalation

[lwsimon]

For clarification, Teflon coating of projectiles is designed to reduce barrel wear, and has nothing to do with penetration.

Most ammo manufacturers now use molybdenum coatings - not sure if that is because it is more effective, or because of the dumb "Teflon-coated cop-killing bullets that go through a bullet-proof vest!" bullshit the Brady group shrieked about in the 90s. FWIW, most any rifle bullet will penetrate light armor, and there are several surplus rounds that can even penetrate level IIIa from a pistol - 7.62x25 Tokarev being the most popular, in the CZ-52.

Re:Escalation

[mayko]

Well its really both it's density and hardness. The Brinell hardness of U-238 is 2,400, which is just shy of tungsten at 2,570. Iron is 490.

Also, DU has incendiary properties (somewhat similar to magnesium) which make it great as an artillery shell.

Re:Escalation

[lwsimon]

Also, brass rounds aren't "banned", though there are some odd regulations.

Re:Escalation

[Anonymous Coward]

Speaking as someone with two broken ribs and a broken clavicle, your imaginary soldiers are pussies if they can't walk away from a single broken rib.

Re:Escalation

[Anonymous Coward]

Pork != Leather

Re:Escalation

[T Murphy]

In that case we should try to make armor out of Jello. That way we trick them into trying to attack us with Jello instead of bullets. Not to mention the mass of new recruits we'll get when people hear they get paid to be in a giant Jello fight.

Re:Escalation

[Anonymous Coward]

you want all the force located in one small, strong, pointy area for penetration; which is why armor penetrating rounds are jacketed or tipped in a metal much stronger than lead or copper(steel, tungsten, depleted uranium).

Actually, the advantage of DU isn't its strength but its density:

Depleted uranium is very dense; at 19050 kg/m^3, it is 1.67 times as dense as lead, only slightly less dense than tungsten and gold, and 84% as dense as osmium or iridium, which are the densest known substances under standard (i.e., Earth-surface) pressures. Thus a given mass of it has a smaller diameter than an equivalent lead projectile, with less aerodynamic drag and deeper penetration due to a higher pressure at point of impact.

Also from Wiki:

Depleted-uranium penetrators have the advantage of being pyrophoric and self-sharpening on impact, resulting in intense heat and energy focused on a minimal area of the target's armor.

Re:Escalation

[Anonymous Coward]

This is usually referred to as Sectional Density... the weight of the bullet divided by the square of the bullet diameter. Here in the USA, we usually use pounds for bullet weight (7000 grains per pound) and inches for the bullet diameter. So, given bullets of equal dimensions but one made of more dense material, the more dense one will have a higher sectional density and will tend to have deeper penetration, all else being equal.

Also, the article talks about 1400fps bullets so it must be talking about handgun rounds. Still impressive but it'd be interesting to see how many layers it would require for standard military issue rifle rounds.

Re:Escalation

[Duradin]

I'd like to see a human powered whip take off someone's hand in one go.

A whip has speed, but the striking point doesn't have much mass and you can't continue to apply force to it. After the energy of the initial impact is spent you're done.

A sword, on the other hand, doesn't have the speed of a whip's tip but it has more mass, applies the its force in a very small area, and you can continuously apply more force.

Which is one of the reasons kevlar on its own does well against bullets but poorly against a blade. It can spread out the force of the initial a bit impact but the blade point doesn't deform and the blade is driven in with additional force which the cut fibers can't disperse.

Re:Escalation

[Anonymous Coward]

as osmium or iridium, which are the densest known substances under standard (i.e., Earth-surface) pressures

Neutron star? Pretty sure it's denser under STP.

Re:Escalation

[Anonymous Coward]

it doesn't matter if it takes an inch of the stuff to stop an armour piercing round as long as it is light and fairly durable, or flexible for use in personal armour like a vest. think how much a 12 x 12 x .5 steel plate masses and then compare that to the same amount of nanotubes. No iron, less vulnerability to magnetic mines. this has huge implications for everything from aircraft to tanks, to cars.

Re:Escalation

[clone53421]

Pretty sure it's not under STP.

Re:Escalation

[Bruce Perens]

I've heard of an anti-tank round with a molten metal core. I assume it's some pyrotechnical process that melts it upon firing.

Re:Escalation

[Forge]

You may have to wait ontil about 23 weeks after never.

The only reason for using these exotic materials is that steel is just too heavy. Otherwise we could build body armour that looks like what was worn in Medieval Europe, but is around 3/4 of an inch thick. The problem is not many people can walk in a 400 Lb vest or a 150 Lb Helmet

That light weight which makes them superior for mobile armor (Fixed bunkers are still mostly just Iron blends and rock) makes them less effective as projectiles If you want to see how this work get a gulf ball and a table tennis (ping pong) ball. Stand 20 feet from the cheapest pane of glass you can find and throw each one as hard as you can, then compare the results.

Hint: try to hit it with the ping pong ball before throwing the gulf ball.

Re:Escalation

[sexconker]

"On a side note, I'm pretty sure whips are only effective against Dracula and Nazis."

You forgot lions. Lion tamers use a whip and a chair.

I await further AC replies...

Re:Escalation

[Chrontius]

THV rounds are banned by name and description as armor-piercing.

If you are NOT a (FFL) licensee under the Gun Control Act (an individual) It is:
ok to OWN AP ammo
ok to SELL AP ammo
ok to BUY AP ammo
ok to SHOOT AP ammo
NOT ok to MAKE AP ammo (18 USC sec. 922(a)(7))
NOT ok to IMPORT AP ammo (18 USC sec. 922(a)(7))

The definition of AP ammo is at 18 USC sec. 921(a)(17): "(B) The term `armor piercing ammunition' means- (i) a projectile or projectile core which may be used in a handgun and which is constructed entirely (excluding the presence of traces of other substances) from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium; or[...]

Emphasis mine.

Re:Escalation

[sexconker]

Fuck. 1400 fps is fast.

But can it play Crysis?

Re:Escalation

[Anonymous Coward]

The other problems are how do you get a piece of it, mold it into a bullet (I bet it's internal gravity would pull it back into a sphere) and contain the atomic blast that would be needed to get it moving to projectile velocities. Well, maybe not an atomic blast but the dang stuff is that much heavier that you'd need something more energetic that your standard propellant explosive to get it moving.

Re:Escalation

[PitaBred]

A leather whip won't get through leather armor, though. Not even close. Again, different physics at play.

Re:Escalation

[SSJ_Ramon]

You're thinking of a shaped charge round.

Re:Escalation

[Anonymous Coward]

apples and oranges

Re:Escalation

[hot soldering iron]

Interesting anecdote: When I was in the service (Army Infantry), some of the older sargents got to talking about unusual ammunition that they'd used/tested/heard about. Depleted Uranium came up, because it was before the first Desert Storm and no one had used it before. The other one still hasn't been used that I know of. It was a hollow plastic nose & metal cup round filled with liquid teflon.

The story went that during Viet Nam, a sniper was sent to wound some particular General, not kill him. He wasn't the greatest strategist, so we knew how to handle him, and didn't want him dead, but for some upcoming engagement we wanted him on the sidelines, so he was marked for a wounding and not a dirt-nap. They sent the sniper out with these new liquid teflon rounds to try. Mistake. When the round hit the General in the shoulder, the liquid came out in strings and tore his whole arm and shoulder off, inducing massive shock and bleeding him out in seconds.

Probably BS, but makes for an interestingly morbid story.

Re:Escalation

[georgeha]

chortle!

Re:Escalation

[Hal_Porter]

The story went that during Viet Nam, a sniper was sent to wound some particular General, not kill him. He wasn't the greatest strategist, so we knew how to handle him, and didn't want him dead, but for some upcoming engagement we wanted him on the sidelines, so he was marked for a wounding and not a dirt-nap. They sent the sniper out with these new liquid teflon rounds to try. Mistake. When the round hit the General in the shoulder, the liquid came out in strings and tore his whole arm and shoulder off, inducing massive shock and bleeding him out in seconds.

This sort of thing is basically the reason why I like Americans.

Re:Escalation

[DevConcepts]

Politicians as ammo?

The ideal projectile material is extremely dense...

Re:Escalation

[Anonymous Coward]

Probably BS, but makes for an interestingly morbid story.

Sounds like a dumdum, but also like BS, because the should've tested the bullet on a dummy target beforehand.

Re:Escalation

[Anonymous Coward]

People also used leather as armor, but so far no one has dug up a leather sword.

Leather is a bad and arbitrary example. Try it with plastic, instead:

People also use plastic as armor, and every child knows there are plastic swords.

Re:Escalation

[Icegryphon]

Fuck. 1400 fps is fast. But can it play Crysis?

NO, it can't play Crysis!
YES, They are on Namek!
QUIT ASKING!!!

Re:Escalation

[Anonymous Coward]

I believe the standard reason for it is environmental. People getting worked up about all the lead being left around on the battlefield and leaching into the groundwater.

What these rounds are going to do to the inside of the barrel is another question entirely.

Re:Escalation

[modecx]

The definition of AP ammo is at 18 USC sec. 921(a)(17): "(B) The term `armor piercing ammunition' means- (i) a projectile or projectile core which may be used in a handgun and which is constructed entirely (excluding the presence of traces of other substances) from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium; or

(ii) a full jacketed projectile larger than .22 caliber designed and intended for use in a handgun and whose jacket has a weight of more than 25 percent of the total weight of the projectile.

It's important to note that this subsection relates ONLY to ammunition which can be loaded in handguns. There are few shops with CNC lathes which turn out solid brass bullets, supposedly of highly uniform density metal, which are sold to be hand loaded for long range shooters. Steel and tungsten core rifle ammo is commonly available--or at least it was before all the hoarding hullabaloo.

This is the reason why FN Herstal couldn't ship the 5.7x27mm cartridge with the SS190 Steel/Aluminum core bullet. It can be used both in their PS90 carbine and FiveSeven pistol. If they only marketed the carbine in the US, an argument could be made that they would be legally able to ship the SS190 ammo, as it isn't intended for handguns, and by definition isn't armor piercing ammo, per federal law.

Re:Escalation

[smoker2]

gulf ball ? is that where the Arab Cinderella lost her slipper ?
The cheapest pane of glass I can find is someone elses.

Re:Escalation

[gtbritishskull]

If you will recall the OP...

If artillery has problems getting through carbon nanotubes, oxyaluminum nitride, and spinel, how long until the artillery itself is made of those materials?

So, are you saying that whips were created to get through leather armor? If so, I think you need some sort of cite. If not, it is best if you take the post in context of what was said in the previous post (and before that and before that all the way up to OP). That the board is set up where you reply to comments. So that you don't have to explicitly say what the entire context of your statement is.

Re:Escalation

[Anonymous Coward]

It's the fastest thing *short of* a fighter jet. So his suggestion is that there is nothing that moves between the speeds of the tip of a whip and a fighter jet. Your examples aren't short of a fighter jet. Get some new ones.

Re:Escalation

[Anonymous Coward]

its really both it's density and hardness

That's what she said.

Re:Escalation

[sumdumass]

You also forgot french people occupying Mexico. Zorro used a whip just as much as his sword.

Re:Escalation

[budgenator]

Your probably thinking about WP, White Phosphorus. Technically it's a smoke/incendiary round and produces gruesome burns on flesh and re-ignites on contact with oxygen. The White Phosphorus will melt at 44 C so the rounds have to be stored vertically. When I got out shortly after Desert Storm, officially WP was being replaced with Red Phosphorus which has much better IR obscuring smoke, is easier to handle and less gruesome on personnel; WP was limited to existing stocks.

Re:Escalation

[budgenator]

If the casing were built out of CarbonNT composite then the explosive payload could be increased without sacrificing range or bore wear.

Re:Escalation

[jafiwam]

A leather whip is very useful in sword combat.

It gives the swordsman something to drag tje body to the ditch with after he rushes under his opponent's guard and kills him.

Go play some more D&D dude, and this time, don't roll up another half-elf thief.

Re:Escalation

[Anonymous Coward]

Death match: me and my three pound steel long sword vs you and your leather whip. If you forget yours I'll loan you mine. The deliverable damage is *not* comparable to a sword.

Re:Escalation

[Krishnoid]

I came across a reference to this a while back:

In the 1970's, Kopsch, Turcos and Ward produced their "KTW" handgun ammunition using steel cored bullets capable of great penetration. Following further experimentation, in 1981 they began producing bullets constructed primarily of brass. The hard brass bullets caused exceptional wear on handgun barrels, a problem combated by coating the bullets with Teflon. The Teflon coating did nothing to improve penetration, it simply reduced damage to the gun barrel.

Re:Escalation

[Anonymous Coward]

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

Re:Escalation

[jpmorgan]

DU rounds also don't absorb energy on impact by deforming (blunting), they tend to fracture instead. A properly manafactured DU round will 'self-sharpen' as it passes through another object, allowing much deeper penetration for the same KE.

Re:Escalation

[MillionthMonkey]

If only the victim had DU to fire too. The solution is for *everybody* to have DU rounds. That will settle disputes quickly.

Re:Escalation

[DMUTPeregrine]

I'm into sport whipcracking and swordsmanship. The fall (leather end used in cutting tricks) of a whip CAN cut, but is nowhere near as damaging as a sword. Also, the fall & popper only go a bit above mach 1, there are plenty of things faster (such as bullets). Also, whips were never used as weapons, they're not effective as such. Bullwhips and stockwhips are used for the loud sound, not the speed of the fall. While they can cut they are not particularly effective at doing so. Hitting a stationary (shaken) soda can and cutting it is easy, hitting a moving target is very hard. No whip can cut clear through a tatami mat.

Re:Escalation

[Forge]

The cheapest pane of glass I can find is someone elses.

But only if you outrun them.

Re:Escalation

[cmarkn]

That would be the ideal material because it is not only dense but imparts its own spin regardless of the barrel.

The problem is when you melt them down to cast bullets, all the denseness runs out.

Re:Escalation

[RockDoctor]

People also used leather as armor, but so far no one has dug up a leather sword.

Substitute "feather" for "leather" and you get an even better example. ( http://dml.cmnh.org/2005May/msg00085.html is the first result that comes up through Google, though I clearly recall seeing it referenced in an ink-on-paper reference book too. That the same discussion was had in the same place a decade previously ... http://dml.cmnh.org/1995Jan/msg00315.html ... shouldn't be surprising. The palaeontologists have a long-standing interest in what properties of scales lead to the evolution of feathers.)

Re:Escalation

[lwsimon]

No, the environmental concerns came after, and they aren't exactly rational. Outdoor shooting ranges can have some issues with lead leeching into groundwater, but it takes decades to get to that point, and its not hard to correct the issue.

I think we can all agree, though, that legislation is not based on rationality.

Re:Escalation

[bar-agent]

If they were on Namek, wouldn't it be OVER 3000 instead of 1400?

Re:Escalation

[badkarmadayaccount]

I say we keep trying!

Re:Escalation

[badkarmadayaccount]

OVER 9000, you insensitive clod!

Re:Escalation

[badkarmadayaccount]

There are more interesting applications for such a material than weaponry. Such as engine seals. There is a lot of engine longevity and efficiency to be gained from high strength bellows for expansion chambers. And the problem with Kevlar is that it doesn't take well to high temperatures.

Re:Escalation

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes but the 'density' of politicians isn't uniform enough to be a reliable ammo round.

"Mechanical multicaliber gun"?

[johndiii]

Anyone know what this is, and if it's anything more that a marketing superlative? The only Google hits for the phrase are this story.

Sounds like marketing-speak for "gee-whiz super-powerful gun", though I suppose that it could be some arrangement of barrels that tests the stuff with various caliber rounds. I'm not sure why one would bother with such a thing.

Re:"Mechanical multicaliber gun"?

[ilikebees]

I'm not sure why one would bother with such a thing.

I imagine to test its effectiveness against different types of rounds. I also would be interested in seeing what sort of device this is.

Re:"Mechanical multicaliber gun"?

[Shakrai]

Maybe they used a .357 magnum revolver and invented that term so none of the hoplophobes in the media would freak out ;)

Re:"Mechanical multicaliber gun"?

[Monkeedude1212]

Its mechanical, like most guns. And there are multiple Calibers, meaning its more than 1.

Re:"Mechanical multicaliber gun"?

[OrangeMonkey11]

All or most armor manufacturers use a table top mounted "test gun" that they can change out the barrel and receiver to fire different caliber to test the protective effectiveness of their product. I don't think anyone can buy one of these you have to get them specially built.

If you ever watch any History or Discovery channel show(s) about fire-arms chances are they show a few of these.

Re:"Mechanical multicaliber gun"?

[Tekfactory]

There are several rifles and pistols that can be changed to accept different barrels and actions into the receiver. These different parts shoot ammunition of different sizes.

I would assume this is a bench mounted receiver that can be triggered remotely. Kind of like the mythbuster's Curve a Bullet Robot. This is done to make each shot as mechanically similar as possible and without endangering a human shooter that shouldn't be on the range on an armor defelction test.

Why not have a bench grip or vise? The handles of these weapons are probably screwed into the mount, not gripped in the traditional sense.

Re:"Mechanical multicaliber gun"?

[Anonymous Coward]

I imagine they used a "universal receiver", which are pretty common in laboratories that test armor or ammunition. They're useful for test purposes, but not exactly good for concealed carry.

"Mechanical multicaliber gun" is what you get when the PR people have no idea what else to call the device.

Re:"Mechanical multicaliber gun"?

[Hijacked Public]

You could bolt a TC Encore to a table, no receiver change required.

Re:"Mechanical multicaliber gun"?

[Tekfactory]

Oh yeah, not to reply to myself, but shortly after high school I did some patent drawings for a cylindrical weapons mount you could load into a 120mm smoothbore cannon and inside the mount you could configure a .308, .50 cal or 25mm match grade barrels attached to an trigger mechanism that could be activated remotely while loaded in the main cannon of an Abrams.

This was supposed to be used for training purposes using ammo already found in the US Armory stores.

IIRC they went with a German training aid instead.

Re:"Mechanical multicaliber gun"?

[axehind]

I believe they mean it doesnt use actually bullets. The ones I've seen use compressed air. They are built so barrel changing is easy so you can easily test different calibers. I believe the standard test uses a 22 caliber wedge shaped projectile shot at a certain FPS.

Re:"Mechanical multicaliber gun"?

[Anonymous Coward]

Mechanical: a mounted gun that can be fired remotely for safety. Multicaliber: Can use different caliber ammunition. Gee, that was hard.

Re:"Mechanical multicaliber gun"?

[CrimsonAvenger]

Anyone know what this is, and if it's anything more that a marketing superlative?

I can only speculate what they really mean, but the Thompson Center Contender is a single shot firearm designed to allow replacement of the barrel with a new barrel in pretty much any calibre from .17 on up. Which means that one of them, with a suitable pile of barrels (conveniently, T-C manufactures barrels too) can fire pretty much any rifle, pistol, or shotgun round in creation.

Re:"Mechanical multicaliber gun"?

[i.r.id10t]

Contender and ContenderG2 are limited to lower pressure rounds. The TC Encore gets around this, same basic design just stronger.

Re:"Mechanical multicaliber gun"?

[afidel]

Probably a big air cannon with sabot sheathing around the bullets.

Re:"Mechanical multicaliber gun"?

[Anonymous Coward]

Despite the fact that the .357 magnum fires both .357 and .38 "caliber" rounds, the reality is, it is not really multi-caliber. .38 caliber is actually .357 caliber. The difference between the rounds is not the width of the bullet, it's the powder charge. The reason .38 is called .38 despite only being .357 inches wide, is because it is a throwback to older days when they measured the width of the shell casing instead of the width of the bullet.

As for shell length, the .38 shells are mostly empty. The reason they are the length they are is because they were first made before smokeless powder was invented. Smokeless powder is far more compact, and so when they switched to the new powder, they didn't have to use anywhere near as much in order to get the same energy release. They kept the shell size to make sure older guns were still compatible with it. As for why you can't use a .357 shell in a .38 gun, it's because of pressure constraints; a .38 can't handle the energy of a .357 round, and would probably explode if you attempted to fire one. For that reason, and that reason alone, the .357 is about 1/8 of an inch longer; i.e. so that the round won't fit into a .38 gun accidentally.

Re:"Mechanical multicaliber gun"?

[Twisted64]

If you ever watch any History or Discovery channel show(s) about fire-arms...

Or if you watch the new Batman movies? "Are you sure you made it loud enough?"

hmm

[Anonymous Coward]

The military can save millions in fuel cost, for only a few billion to install nano-tube wiring in all their stuff

Re:hmm

[Raffaello]

Not that I'm defending wasteful military spending, but the reason they want this is not so much for the dollar savings on fuel, but for the logistical advantages of needing less fuel: extended range of existing aircraft, reduced need for aerial refueling, more sorties on the same fuel budget, etc.

Re:hmm

[Raffaello]

left out the most important one: ability to carry more ordinance per sortie.

Re:hmm

[afidel]

The problem isn't the cost of the fuel, it's the cost and lost opportunities from the long supply train. Most non-lopsided battles aren't determined by who has the better equipment or even the better soldiers but by who has the better quartermaster.

Just wait

[ciaohound]

"Buy Thompson's Carbon Nanotube Bullets. The only nanotubes tough enough to penetrate nanotubes."

Re:Just wait

[Anonymous Coward]

yo dawg, i herd u like guns and tubes...

Re:Just wait

[Anonymous Coward]

Welcome to the CIRCUS of VALUUUE!

Come back when you get some money, BUDDY!

The first thing you hear about a new technology...

[clyde_cadiddlehopper]

In the 1980s I worked in advanced ceramic materials development for Corning. We were pitching insulating sleeves to be cast into cylinder heads. At a meeting with the Ford SVO engineering group, one of their engineers said "The first thing you hear about a new material is always the best thing you will hear about it. After that, the 'yeah, buts' begin." Yeah, but is it safe? Yeah, but is it affordable? Yeah, but will it conduct / dissipate heat? Yeah, but is it environmentally friendly? It takes time for systems to be redesigned around the special attributes of revolutionary materials.

You missed one -

[Kupfernigk]

Yeah, but won't the existing technology develop to do the same job faster and cheaper than this one can be got to market? That's why wood, ceramics, iron and cement are still the base materials of civilisation, rather than titanium, magnesium and carbon fiber.

Re:You missed one -

[GameMaster]

The only industry I've ever heard of that being the case in is with Memory and IC substrates and logical design. Wood, ceramics, iron, and cement haven't "advanced", significantly to keep their lead over the others. The reason that titanium, magnesium, and carbon fiber haven't overtaken them yet is that we haven't, yet, developed a super-cheap production method for them (similar to the Bessemer process that allowed steel production to become cheap enough for it to over-take iron and the Faber process that allowed Aluminum to stop being worth more, per pound, than gold).

Re:You missed one -

[ShadowRangerRIT]

And to be fair, in some cases the new materials have taken over. Most passenger jet designs are switching to carbon fiber bodies; the cost is high, but the lighter material means that the you need far less fuel on every trip, eventually paying for itself. (Yes, the 787 is having problems in production, but I suspect that's more a matter of poor coordination than any intrinsic weakness in the material.) And the GP ignored plastics, which relatively recently displaced all sorts of time tested materials in the construction of all manner of products. Who's to say that we won't find a way to produce carbon nanotubes cheaply in the next few years?

Re:You missed one -

[smellsofbikes]

The electrolytic production of aluminum is Hall-Heroult, I believe. There exists a titanium electrolysis system or two, but they're still patent-encumbered. (I've also heard people argue that it's the difficulty in working with titanium rather than the production costs that make it so expensive.)

Re:You missed one -

[Anonymous Coward]

I get your point, but your examples are poor. Wood and ceramics have largely been supplanted by plastic and as for iron, since the nineteenth century, steel has largely taken its place.

Re:You missed one -

[Idiomatick]

http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/06/08/223234 thought you'd be interested.

Re:You missed one -

[Zerth]

Working raw titanium can be a pain. If you aren't careful, it will gall and go all lumpy.

It'll catch fire before it melts, unless it is in an inert gas environment. Far right on the periodic table inert, it'll burn in nitrogen.

On the plus side, you'll have lots of titanium oxide dust around. If you think FeO+Al is fun, try TiO+Al+Fluorite+Calcium Sulfate. It won't just burn through an engine block, it might keep going into the concrete @ 3800 F

Re:You missed one -

[Anonymous Coward]

Given that carbon nanotubes and plastics are both made of the same stuff (Carbon), I'd say the odds are pretty good we'll see nanotube materials throughout society.

Re:You missed one -

[hitmark]

for some reason, whenever anything related to fluorine shows up in something, things tend to get really "funny"...

Re:You missed one -

[Eclipse-now]

Carbonised chicken feathers are being researched for their nano-tube like behaviour, and are being developed for steel replacement. (Especially when put together with bean-curd "glue"). True story. They've even mentioned using them to replace the blades on wind-turbines.

Re:You missed one -

[Hurricane78]

I've seen that happen with FeO+Al too. Went right trough the hood, motor, axle, and into the concrete.

Unfortunately it was not enough to create a new volcano. I could have needed the hideout back then.

Sign Me Up:

[Anonymous Coward]

I need super-duper protection in my HUMMER for the impending collapse and the Limbaugh-Palin 2012 presidential road show.

Yours In Crime,
President-VICE ( of the United Gulags of America ) Richard B. Cheney

How about using this for sails?

[Smidge207]

What about using carbon nanotube sheets to make sails for sailboats? Spinnaker nylon which is about the lightest they have still weighs about 14 g/m2. Most sail material weighs 2 or 3or more times that weight, and is very prone to tearing. Heavier more durable sail material, "Dacron," weighs generally between 7-10 oz or 200-300 g/m2. Carbon fiber ia alresdy used to strengthen sails, generally for high performance racing for boats and owners with very deep pockets. Furthermore what about making carbon fiber masts out of sheets of carbon nanotubes. Even furthermore than that, what about replacing rhe fiberglass in fiberglass with carbon nanotube sheets impregnated with epoxy for stiffness. Wow CN sheets are really going to break open new industries very soon.

One day...

[VShael]

the internet will be made of a series of these tubes, and we will remember the wise words of the prophet Ted Stevens.

hmmm

[OrangeMonkey11]

I wonder if they can some how harden the nanotube fibers fabric and create some sort of light weight full body exo suits. I know you can do it with Kevlar but it usually turn out really bulky and heavy due to the resin.

There was a Cannadian guy that created the Bear suit out of a combination of kevlar and chainmail and the suit weight several hundred pound and you can't even move in it; the thing look like a Big Daddy

Re:hmmm

[GameMaster]

He was able to move in it, but not very well. If it were combined with some of the powered exo-skeletons out right now it would, probably, be what you're talking about. Of course, the weave of the Kevlar fiber used makes a huge difference in whether it handles bullets or knives. I'm guessing that his designed used a weave intended for knives as it would be more comparable to a bear's claws. That would have to be swapped out.

Re:hmmm

[QuantumRiff]

You know, considering some of the bears you might be facing would be several hundred pounds, and several times stronger than you, maybe you wouldn't want a "bear suit" to be light weight. Just cause their claws and teeth couldn't puncture the suit, doesn't mean they couldn't throw you into trees, pin you to the ground, or knock you into the water. Sometimes weight is a good thing. Unless of course, you are trying to outrun the bear, which you can't do...

Re:hmmm

[gbjbaanb]

Bear to another, so this guy comes over in his lightweight 'bear proof' suit, I tried clawing him - no effect, I tried biting him, no effect, I tried shouting at him, no effect. So I sat on the bugger until he stopped wriggling.

Re:hmmm

[PitaBred]

I can haz a plural?

Wow!

[Drunken Buddhist]

...That's some tough sheet!

thicker than I expected

[pomakis]

A fifth of an inch thick? When I initially read "sheets of carbon nanotubes" I was envisioning something on the order of micrometers thick. I'm sure this is still progress, but the story isn't as exciting as I was initially expecting it to be.

Re:thicker than I expected

[Ephemeriis]

A fifth of an inch thick? When I initially read "sheets of carbon nanotubes" I was envisioning something on the order of micrometers thick. I'm sure this is still progress, but the story isn't as exciting as I was initially expecting it to be.

I know basically nothing about armor and weapons and whatnot...

But, while 1/5" may not be as thin as you imagined, it may very well be thinner than what is currently required. How thick a sheet of kevlar is necessary to stop a bullet?

Re:thicker than I expected

[jgtg32a]

Also FTA they were surprised it even worked

Re:thicker than I expected

[lwsimon]

It doesn't list the calibers used in TFA, so hard to be a judge. I shoot 1/4" steel plates all day with a .223 without much damage to them - though a lot depends on the bullet type. Lead bullets will splash, lead-nose jacketed bullets will shatter, steel-core will damage or penetrate. Step up to a .308 and good ammo, you're going to need 1/2" or more to have a chance of stopping it.

A .50? The only time I've shot steel with a .50 BMG, it penetrated the 3/4" steel plates I had like they were paper.

If I had to guess, they're talking about handgun rounds, though - in which case, it sounds pretty equivalent to Kevlar. Kevlar isn't just a "sheet", though, as a single sheet is easy to penetrate - its more about the way they interlock when layered, causing the bullet to apply its force to a greater surface area before penetrating.

Re:thicker than I expected

[poopdeville]

Ouch, how many millimeters do you think a fifth of an inch is? Hint: it's 5.

Re:thicker than I expected

[clone53421]

GP said micrometers, not millimeters. E.g. a sheet of 3 mil plastic would be 76.2 micrometers thick. A fifth of an inch is 5,080 micrometers.

Vests?

[bryanp]

If they could make it work it sounds like it would be a great material for a bullet resistant vest.

Although getting hit with a taser while wearing one ...

Re:Vests?

[Nobo]

Although getting hit with a taser while wearing one ...

Electrical charge stays on the outside of a conductive sphere.
See (http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/potsph.html)

So In theory, wrapping yourself in a conductive nanotube mesh would prevent the charge from hurting you.

And wrapping yourself in tinfoil would protect you from the police even better! ... Waaaait a minute.

Re:Vests?

[zenopus]

Would it not just work as a Faraday cage?

Re:Vests?

[Anonymous Coward]

Lucky I'm perfectly spherical then.

Re:Vests?

[Anonymous Coward]

Taser? This would be perfect for a bulletproof taserproof vest - after all, it's highly conductive, much more so than the human body. It would short the taser out - assuming, of course, both barbs hit on the vest...

Re:Vests?

[Anonymous Coward]

Thats the line of thought that comes from high school science. "Electricity takes the path of least resistance !" It does take that path... but... its very misleading. It would be much more accurate to say, "Electricity takes every path, but prefers the path of least resistance" You learn this real quick dealing high voltage electricity. The only way to confine electricity to a single path is to have a single super-conducting path. Even shorting out a high voltage source with a copper wire will still not protect you from being shocked. Copper has resistance and you've just added yourself into the circuit as a parallel resistor. The skin effect described isn't so accurate either. The real question is, would a conductive wrapping reduce the shock you feel enough to bring the pain and loss of muscular control down to manageable levels... maybe

Re:Vests?

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

The real question is, would a conductive wrapping reduce the shock you feel enough to bring the pain and loss of muscular control down to manageable levels... maybe

The answer is YES.
Watch for the part where he tasers the guy's head and nothing happens, a little anti-climatic, but still great.

Re:Calling BS

[Anonymous Coward]

I would think that the fuel cost would be result from weight savings and not conductivity. With that said, I still don't think millions would be saved.

Not so great

[Anonymous Coward]

I've tried these sheets -- they're scratchy, and they won't stay tucked in under the mattress!

Re:Not so great

[Anonymous Coward]

I've tried these sheets -- they're scratchy, and they won't stay tucked in under the mattress!

It seems silly to put them in your bed. You don't need protection from someone firing blanks.

Re:Calling BS

[Raleel]

My guess is it's more about the weight. carbon nanotubes are about 1/7th the density.

Re:Porn Troll Satisfies

[Anonymous Coward]

You know, most people here are with average attention span of goldfish, you will not get too far as successful troll with such a long posts.

I suggest something shorter. Also as everybody knows, you should troll about Niggers and M$. Porn trolls just make keyboards wet. They will not create any discussion about your troll post as it's quite hard to type on such a sticky keyboard.

For more, search Trolling 101 on your preferred search engine. Unless it's Bing, as you'll find nothing.

Re:Calling BS

[Anonymous Coward]

The fuel cost savings comes in the form of weight. Copper is likely a lot heavier than the carbon nanotube material. Less weight, less fuel to keep the plane aloft. Alternatively, they could use it for carrying heavier payloads.

Re:Calling BS

[Ephemeriis]

"Saving millions on fuel costs"

There is very little energy wasted in copper wiring, especially in airplanes! Moving to a material of higher conductivity will result in minuscule savings, and will be nowhere remotely close to covering the cost of the (extremely expensive) materials.

They aren't going to save fuel because it is more conductive. They aren't burning tons of fuel because of transmission losses from one end of the plane to the other.

They are going to save fuel because the nanotube wires will be lighter than the copper wires we use now. Less weight == less fuel.

Re:Calling BS

[Gravitron 5000]

It's not about resistive losses. It's about weight. Also carbon nanotubes haven't benefited from any economy of scale efficiencies, and hence the cost is likely to be much less once they are able to be manufactured in quantity. It's not like carbon is a rare material.

Re:Calling BS

[MyLongNickName]

There is very little energy wasted in copper wiring

Weight is decreased, saving the fuel, not energy conduction.

Re:Calling BS

[Anonymous Coward]

its the weight not the efficiency of the conductor that would save fuel...

Have they resolved the problem

[Phizzle]

of carbon nanotubes causing cancer? I am aware of several studies that show this stuff behaving like asbestos. http://www.technologyreview.com/Nanotech/20815/

Re:Have they resolved the problem

[ShadowRangerRIT]

That does require you to inhale them. If they're creating sufficiently long tubes with sufficient durability and weaving them together, it's not as much of a problem. After all, you rarely inhale your shirt. :-) That said, I have no doubt it will be less durable than promised and this will be an issue, but they won't bother with safety tests up front because there are no regulation requiring it yet.

Re:Have they resolved the problem

[IndustrialComplex]

After all, you rarely inhale your shirt

Not all at once, but throw a bunch of shirts into your dryer and then check the lint trap.

Re:Have they resolved the problem

[Knuckles]

People didn't inhale asbestos-lined buildings or brake pads either.

Re:Calling BS

[e4g4]

A 747 has approximately 190,000 feet of copper wiring - per this. I would imagine that that translates to quite a bit of weight - if that weight were to be reduced significantly (by half or better) - the fuel savings would not be negligible. The other place suggested for their usage was in satellites - which is a market where the cost is per kilogram - and satellites, as they are now, I'm sure owe quite a bit of their weight to the wiring that makes them function.

Re:Calling BS

[Rakshasa Taisab]

No no, obviously they're currently pushing fuel through those copper wires, and the nanotube things are going to percolate the fuel much better.

The hand that giveth...

[sandmaninator]

"The military also hopes to replace copper wiring in planes and satellites with highly conductive nanotubes, saving millions of dollars in fuel costs."

...and adding millions of dollars in carbon nanotube costs.

Is there anything they CAN'T do...

[Anonymous Coward]

Is there anything they CAN'T do with carbon nanotubes? Between them and stem cells, we should be able to build/cure anything anybody ever thought of, according to reports.

Re:Is there anything they CAN'T do...

[Byzantine]

Sadly, carbon nanotubes cannot be made into flying unicorns.

Re:Is there anything they CAN'T do...

[Anonymous Coward]

[citation needed]

Re:Is there anything they CAN'T do...

[sgbett]

Yeah, leave that to the stem cells.

Re:Is there anything they CAN'T do...

[sexconker]

I can't wait for next week's headline about building stem cells from nanotubes. Then the next week, the report about repairing any nanotube material by slathering nanotube stem cells on it.

Re:Is there anything they CAN'T do...

[Locke2005]

Actually they can, but the unicorns "do not fly so much as plummet."

Re:Is there anything they CAN'T do...

[Byzantine]

Is this where the stem cells come in?

vs Kevlar

[florescent_beige]

According to wikipedia the density of nanotube is not that much different from Kevlar. Kevlar ~1.4, nanotube ~1.3.

So where's the advantage over Kevlar? It could be that the ballistic performance is much better than Kevlar allowing you to make armor with less material but otherwise this isn't an obviously better material than Kevlar.

In ballistic applications Kevlar will probably continue to win based on cost.

As for structural uses, back in the annals of history aramid fiber (Kevlar) was thought to be the Next Big Thing. Then people started to realize that while very fantastic in tension, aramid has sucky compression properties (using Kevlar has been compared to designing with chain). I wonder if nanotubes will suffer the same fate.

Re:vs Kevlar

[MyLongNickName]

Density is not the issue. Otherwise, we would go with lead. The nanotubes are, apparently, better able to spread an impact over a wider surface. This is the reason Kevlar is used and why nanotubes are being looked at.

Re:vs Kevlar

[clone53421]

Um, the idea is lightweight armour that will still stop a round. A 6" steel plate would stop just about anything they can send your way, but you won't be very mobile. Kevlar is lightweight. Carbon nanotubes are even lighter, and apparently they have better force distributing abilities as well, so you also need less thickness.

Re:vs Kevlar

[florescent_beige]

There is already a material out there that is better than Kevlar, it's called Spectra. It's an ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene and despite its existence Kevlar continues to be the standard.

Something needs to be *a lot* better to displace an established standard, not just somewhat better.

Re:vs Kevlar

[Anonymous Coward]

There is already a material out there that is better than Kevlar, it's called Spectra. It's an ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene and despite its existence Kevlar continues to be the standard.

Something needs to be *a lot* better to displace an established standard, not just somewhat better.

Wrong - something needs to be NOT PATENT ENCUMBERED to displace an established standard. Kevlar is relatively cheap to produce now because anyone is allowed to do it since 1980. Spectra is still limited to one manufacturer.

Note that car manufacturers have agreements to release into the public domain any patented invention they make that will increase driver/passenger safety - that's why all cars had airbags as options pretty much as soon as any of them did (before they were mandated). I wish other industries had the decency to do the same.

Re:vs Kevlar

[icegreentea]

While Kevlar is the 'standard', we are kind of moving away from it. The new vests used by the US Army and Marine Corp both incorporate ceramic plates to resist rifle rounds. The new (since 90s) French helmets have been made out of Spectra (or Dyneema... stuff is really confusing to read). But you're right. It has to be a lot better to replace the current standard. Part of the thing with Spectra vs Kevlar is that either on it's on in a vest cannot resist rifle rounds. In both cases, you'll need the added ceramic plates. So the advantage of Spectra and other 'better' fibers shrink even more. The article makes it clear that there's a lot of work left to do. For example, the previous generation Interceptor Body Armor (the one that Bush and Rumsfield got in shit for for not having enough of) is rated to stop all 9mm rounds at 1400 feet/second. The sheets made were able to stop rounds (they don't tell us what rounds which is silly) a little below half of time. So there's some work left to do. But it seems like lots of promise. For example, if four were breached, but three showed no damage, and (assuming that these were the only 7 tested), it suggests that the problem is manufacturing quality and consistency, something we can safely assume will improve with time.

Violence

[CopaceticOpus]

This is so typical. Someone discovers how to make a sheet of carbon nanotubes, and the first thing they do is shoot at it. Where is the study telling us how huggable these nanotube sheets might be?

Re:Violence

[PitaBred]

Someone's always shooting at someone else. If this sheet blocks bullets effectively, it means that whoever is behind it remains huggable. I'm all for that.

Re:Violence

[TheLink]

Based on the movies, many people get hugged soon after they get shot.

Re:Violence

[demachina]

Yea... where is the squeezably soft nanotube toilet paper.

Re:Violence

[jdevivre]

Yea... where is the squeezably soft nanotube toilet paper.

"Protect Your Ass."

Re:Violence

[deanlandolt]

Where is the study telling us how huggable these nanotube sheets might be?

Great point -- there's all kinds of new products this could enable...

New huggable Charmin Ultra Nanosheets...the best sheet ever!

Re:Calling BS

[sarlos]

Carbon Nanotubes are, quoting from the article, "stronger than steel and lighter than plastic." The fuel cost savings comes from the decreased weight, not the better conductivity.

Re:The first thing you hear about a new technology

[cesutherland]

Yeah, but it is still interesting news.

Re:Calling BS

[CyberK]

But I dare say that military perspective is not on saving fuel costs. After all, why save money by putting in a smaller fuel tank when you can keep it the same size and use the fuel savings to fly further/faster?

"Maximum Game!"

[Anonymous Coward]

all those replys and no "Maximum Armor" lines????

Re:Calling BS

[Ephemeriis]

But I dare say that military perspective is not on saving fuel costs. After all, why save money by putting in a smaller fuel tank when you can keep it the same size and use the fuel savings to fly further/faster?

It equals out to the same thing.

If you need to drop a bomb on someone 100 miles away, right now it costs you $100 in fuel to do it. If you replace all your copper with nanotubes and make the plane lighter you can do it for $90 in fuel.

If you need to drop a bomb on someone 110 miles away, right now it'll cost you $110 and you'll have to refuel somewhere along the line. Make the plane lighter with nanotubes and now you can do it for $100 in fuel and no refueling along the way.

Even if they don't make the fuel tanks smaller, they'll still be saving money.

Cotton or carbon nanotubes?

[Anonymous Coward]

So... I guess bullet proof sheets can be handy if you're in the habit of getting shot at while sleeping but is it as comfortable as regular cotton sheets?

Groaner

[argent]

DuPont may soon have trouble shooting it down.

Evil. Evil.

Re:Calling BS

[Anonymous Coward]

Carbon nano tubes act as superconductors because the capillary action of the tubes sucks the electrons right through, at zero transmission energy

Yeah but... carcinogenic?

[ukemike]

Carbon nanotubes act a lot like asbestos in our lungs. We don't know that it is carcinogenic yet, but in the initial reaction that CNT causes in mouse lung tissue is the same sort of reaction that asbestos fibers cause. It's not surprising because CNT are so similar to asbestos fibers. They are nanoscale fibers, they are highly resistant to chemical degredate. So I think it would be safer to assume that it is a probably human carcinogen and behave like it is so that 20-40 years from now we don't have hundreds of thousands of people with CNT related lung cancer.

But does it...

[argent]

Is there anything they CAN'T do with carbon nanotubes?

But does it run Linux?

Re:Calling BS

[aslate]

The NewScientist i was reading a few days ago was talking about planes going wireless (that's right, WIRELESS) to save weight on copper wiring. They call it fly-by-wireless.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20327245.300-flybywireless-set-for-takeoff.html

They also claim it has other benefits, such as not having to worry about wires snapping and redundancy. I'd still feel a bit weird flying in a plane with no physical connection to the engines/wings/other.

More bad than good?

[saurongt]

Carbon nanotubes are known to be toxic. Wouldn't having them next to your body in a situation where you are likely to bleed be kind of unnerving? http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13946-nanotubes-toxic-effects-similar-to-asbestos.html

Re:More bad than good?

[ceoyoyo]

From the article you linked:

"Ever since, it was presumed that any needle-like fibres around 20 micrometers long with an ability to persist in the body could have similarly dangerous effects. Donaldson and colleagues have now shown this holds true for carbon nanotubes."

These fibres are supposed to be 100 um long. That may make a difference. Also, they're all glued together rather well. It's certainly not a given that they're also toxic.

Re:More bad than good?

[bogjobber]

Carbon nanotubes are significantly less toxic to the human body than a 150 grain piece of lead traveling at 3000 feet per second.

A Question for the scientists:

[Anonymous Coward]

LEt's say I have a machine, and a wire in it gets cut. I can use some electrical tape, and twist the wire together to fix the circuit.

Question: can I do that with carbon nanotubes? If not, then, how is it a real advantage, given everything has to be repaired at some point?

There's a ringing endorsment

[drewsup]

To quote TFA "We didn't expect it to work at all," he admits. Wow, I'm sold!!

Re:Porn Troll Satisfies

[fireheadca]

I totally lost you. What?

A long way to go yet, much potential

[MobyDisk]

...founded Nanocomp in 2004. They developed a patent-pending system, controlled by a computer, that could produce large quantities of one-millimeter nanotubes. This was long enough to start making yarn and sheets.

So they are still making 1mm long fibers and sewing them together to make strands and sheets. I wonder how much stronger a continuous strand would be? It seems like there is a lot of potential to make these things even stronger.

Re:Calling BS

[Anonymous Coward]

"Saving millions on fuel costs"

There is very little energy wasted in copper wiring, especially in airplanes! Moving to a material of higher conductivity will result in minuscule savings, and will be nowhere remotely close to covering the cost of the (extremely expensive) materials.

It's not about energy losses in the copper wiring! The purported saves are in "fuel costs", so their arguing that carbon-nano tube wiring will result in cable-bundles that weigh less than conventional copper cabling. Reduce the weight on a given aircraft and it reduces the fuel necessary to operate it. I'm not sure if this will really reach the advertised level of savings, but it most certianly is not BS that reducing aircraft weight reduces fuel use.

What kind of measurement system is that??

[jaypifer]

A fifth of an inch? Who uses a fifth? It's bad enough that they aren't using a metric measurement system, but then they use fifths of inches...

Re:What kind of measurement system is that??

[GargamelSpaceman]

Fractions are so underrated. They are so much easier to deal with than decimals.

Re:What kind of measurement system is that??

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree. Anyone who knows what a carbon nanotube is is certainly going to understand what a millimeter is.

In other news...

[kpainter]

Nanocomp Technologies announces that their new nanotube technology is being applied to solve the "Sheryl Crow one square of toilet paper" problem.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/6583067.stm
Specifically, the technology is intended to address "those pesky occasions where two to three could be required".

Carbon Nanotube Sheets?

[moniker127]

Whoever came up with that name sucks. From this point forward, carbon nanotube sheets are called mithril.

Jominy crickets!

[Anonymous Coward]

someone on slashdot who knows about materials science!

I hope they will use nanotubes...

[ctrl-alt-canc]

for improving the quality of new hardware. Nowadays it seems a bit flimsy, isn't it ?!?

Re:Calling BS

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, but I don't see that wire being much bigger than 30 gauge (which is about 1cm thick; pretty darn thick). 190,000 meters (it was meters, not feet) of 30 gauge copper wire only weighs a little over 200 pounds. That's less than a passenger + luggage.

Re:Calling BS

[Anonymous Coward]

The fuel cost savings comes in the form of weight. Copper is likely a lot heavier than the carbon nanotube material. Less weight, less fuel to keep the plane aloft. Alternatively, they could use it for carrying heavier payloads.

This is also applied to high voltage transmission lines. Some companies are now erecting power lines using aluminum as the conductor instead of copper cable. This is because the cost savings in the steel supporting towers outweighs the cost of power loss in the lower conductivity aluminum.

Re:Calling BS

[budgenator]

it's probably the strength, using copper in air-frames pulling 10 G's is challenging, carbon-NT could hold up under 100's of G's such as guided artillery rounds or missiles that would turn a human pilot into jelly.

Jedi Light Saber Missles

[Dareth]

I always wondered why if Jedi light sabers could cut through practically anything, they didn't put them on the end of missiles.

Re:"multicaliber gun"?

[Anonymous Coward]

Or:

Shotgun with multiple pellet sizes

Sabot round

Squeeze bore

i hate seeing america

[nimbius]

shovel more cash into the war machine to create technology for more war.

there must be a better potential use for this than body armor. truck tires to improve efficiency, insulation to lower heating costs, for those non peacemongers perhaps a non-invasive material to detect chemical, radiological, and metal objects yet can be woven into airport seating, who knows. im just sick of seeing this good tech go to more war.

Re:Calling BS

[KindMind]

Even if you estimate is correct, I think you may still see other benefits. For example, if this material is stronger than copper, you would likely see less breakage and shorts. I don't know its properties, but thermal expansion and shrinkage is always an issue with contacts, where copper can work its way loose. If this nanotube material is less thermally sensitive, that would be another benefit. Anyone know how it stacks up?

Re:The first thing you hear about a new technology

[mrosgood]

Hey. Given your experience, I have an off topic question for you.

What are the prospects for ceramic internal combustion engines?

When I was a kid, I read in Scientific American that future cars will likely have ceramic engine blocks. Being air cooled, they'd be more simple and smaller. Being ceramic, the fuel would be burned hotter and so more efficiently. So these ceramic engines would be 1/3rd the size for the same horsepower and burn cleaner.

Alas. Here we are today.

I went back and found that issue of SciAm in the library. From that and other reading, I gather that the two production methods have serious shortcomings. Sintering hasn't been worked out for forms that large. And drilling would be huge expensive and probably leave defects in the material (e.g. cylinder walls).

I did find one news item where the US Navy was buying ceramic engines for unmanned vehicals. It sounded like a turbine engine, vs internal combustion.

Any news, insights, tips you could offer would be great.

Re:Calling BS

[pitterpatter]

Yeah, but I don't see that wire being much bigger than 30 gauge (which is about 1cm thick; pretty darn thick). 190,000 meters (it was meters, not feet) of 30 gauge copper wire only weighs a little over 200 pounds. That's less than a passenger + luggage.

Um, AWG 30 is less than a millimeter, not a centimeter, and a lot of the wiring in an airplane would be bigger than 30 gauge.

On the OP's link they claim that 2% of the weight of a 747 is copper. Boeing says a fully loaded 747 is about 875,000 lbs . If this post is accurate, carbon nanotube conductors might weight as little as 1/7 of what copper conductors weigh. My calculator says that means a savings of 15,000 pounds.

That's a pretty porky passenger, but I might have sat next to him on an Oregon-Ohio trip.

A Better Application

[DynaSoar]

Puncture proof/resistant gloves for health care workers.

How will they join Carbon Nanotube WIRES?

[QuantumHack]

(I am an EE.) Copper wire is useful because a) it conducts electricity well, and b) it is easily joined to other circuits. It can be joined to other circuits because of its properties: soldering because it copper alloys well, crimping/wrapping/twisting because copper is malleable and ductile.

Are carbon nanotubes solderable? I doubt it.

Are carbon nanotubes crimpable or twistable? Again, I doubt it.

So, how are they going to join two nanotube wires?

Re:Yeah but... carcinogenic?

[hitmark]

There are times i find myself wondering if not humanity will kill of technological progress as all paths are found to be dangerous either in the near term (chance of suffocation, starvation, explosions and similar) or long term (cancer being the most typical).

Re:Calling BS

[Anonymous Coward]

Fatigue Fractures anyone?
Carbon nonotubes sound brittle to me. The heating and cooling cycles, and the leakage of fuel and oil. The shake shake fatigue copper is well known, and as an EE said how do you join/solder connections?
They could use aluminium wiring, but they dont.They could use hollow wire - but they dont. And copper stretches when they need to swing on it to get in in - in the factory.

Wouldn't conservatives/creationists...

[Benfea]

...have worked better for that joke?