Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Scientists Identify Possible New Substance With Highest Melting Point

Posted by Soulskill on from the new-hotness dept.

JoshuaZ writes: Researchers from Brown University have tentatively identified an alloy of hafnium, nitrogen and carbon as having an expected melting point of about 7,460 degrees Fahrenheit (4120 Celsius). This exceeds that of the previous record-breaker, tantalum hafnium carbide, which melts at 7,128 F (3942 C). Its record stood for almost a century. At this point, the new alloy is still hypothetical, based on simulations, so the new record has not yet been confirmed by experiment. The study was published in Physical Review B (abstract), and a lay-summary is available at the Washington Post. If the simulations turn out to be correct, the new alloy may be useful in parts like jet engines, and the door will be opened to using similar simulations to search for substances with even higher melting points or with other exotic properties.

25 of 92 comments (clear)

  1. Make the stuff by gurps_npc · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Then publicize. Don't dream up a vaporware material and talk about that to the press.

    --
    excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
    1. Re:Make the stuff by Whiternoise · · Score: 2

      I think you meant publish, publicising is exactly what they're doing! ;)

    2. Re:Make the stuff by godrik · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yeah right slashdot! Stop giving us hope for new fancy material with potential application in engineering! We only care about politics and social issues! This is slashdot, not a geek news website!

    3. Re:Make the stuff by tinkerton · · Score: 2

      Don't dream up a vaporware material

      nono, it's about melting point, not sublimation.

    4. Re:Make the stuff by necro81 · · Score: 2

      The purpose of the investigation was really the atomic-level computer simulation. Specifically, they were investigating whether they could properly simulate the entropy levels of an alloy in the solid and liquid phases, and the heat of fusion required to melt the substance, then extrapolate the melting point from that data. Ultimately, finding a material with a record-high melting point was the challenge used to develop the computation, not an end to itself.

      That said, now that they've identified the alloy, the article mentions they are will be collaborating with another institution to synthesize and characterize it, hopefully verifying their calculations and predictions.

  2. Probably not useful by dj245 · · Score: 5, Informative

    If the simulations turn out to be correct, the new alloy may be useful in parts like jet engines, and the door will be opened to using similar simulations to search for substances with even higher melting points or with other exotic properties.

    No, it won't. Materials for jet engines must be reasonably affordable, machinable or otherwise workable, and available in large quantities. I have about 4600 lbs [2086kg] of 422 stainless going through my shop right now for a single row of blades for one machine. They're big blades, but even for small blades, hundreds of pounds of material is common. An alloy of hafnium, nitrogen and carbon isn't going to be cheap enough for that to ever be feasible. It is probably a brittle material as well. Brittle materials and a high vibration environment don't mix.

    Maybe you could apply it as a coating, but I'm not sure how that would be possible. Almost all coatings of this type require you to liquify or vaporize the coating material. Plus, you run into the same problem as before- a thin coating won't protect the base metal, and a thick one would be prohibitively expensive.

    --
    Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    1. Re:Probably not useful by willworkforbeer · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Hafnium is about a dollar / gram. Nitrogen and carbon are plentiful and relatively cheap. Is this dramatically more expensive than current high temp materials?

      --
      Pretending this is my office full of bitter coworkers..
    2. Re:Probably not useful by EmperorArthur · · Score: 5, Informative

      Hafnium is about a dollar / gram. Nitrogen and carbon are plentiful and relatively cheap. Is this dramatically more expensive than current high temp materials?

      442 stainless steel is US $1500.00 / Ton from Alibaba. Assuming metric, that works out to $1.5/kg, or $0.0015/g.
      Plus that $1/g is just for the raw Hafnium. Alloys like the one proposed here tend to be expensive, time consuming, and finicky to get right.

      Then you get into the fact that producing Hafnium leaves pure Zirconium. Which is typically used as cladding for nuclear fuel rods. Something that a fair portion of the world would freak out about, because anything that's good for nuclear must be bad. Plus there's this gem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      --
      So lets pretend that we've just completed writing this code, as opposed to having just completed sabotaging it -Altera
    3. Re:Probably not useful by Plazmid · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Current jet turbine blades(at least the first stage ones) are made of some of the most exotic materials we know of using some pretty expensive manufacturing processes. First stage jet turbine blades are almost always made of single crystalline super alloy. Oh and they're hollow, so they have to be made from a crazy investment mold. Oh and tiny holes have to be EDM'd into them.

      It's a pretty expensive to make them, but it's worth it. All this crazy manufacturing is to done so that jet turbines can burn hotter, so that by Carnot they're more efficient. Even small changes in efficiency can be worth millions of dollars in fuel savings.

      So as long as this material isn't as hard to process as ceramics(and it exists), it will probably find some use in a jet engine.

    4. Re:Probably not useful by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Those blades also have exotic coatings and actually operate at a temperature above the melting point of the metal in them. A couple of weeks ago I heard the BBC Elements program on nickel and they were bringing up its use in jet engines. Jet turbines use the vast majority of the very limited supply (about 70% of 40 tons) of rhenium produced each year and it is one of the most expensive metals so I doubt the cost is an issue.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    5. Re:Probably not useful by TimothyDavis · · Score: 3, Funny

      You could always use it to make a smelting crucible to melt tantalum hafnium carbide into.

      :)

    6. Re:Probably not useful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Most current single crystal alloy development is focused on the elimination of Hf because of cost and difficulty in maintaining consistent supply. The other very expensive raw material we use is Platinum for oxidation/corrosion coatings. There's also significant focus into reducing and eliminating platinum use. Pratt & Whitney got away from Platinum coating years ago. GE and Rolls still use a lot of platinum but are working on reducing the amount.

      Raw material cost is a significant part of gas turbine airfoil part cost.

  3. Re:Applications? by TheReaperD · · Score: 4, Interesting

    With current fuels, no. However, if you can build engines with much higher melting points the options for fuels grows and you may get an engine with higher power, better fuel efficiency or both. Or you could just end up with a really expensive paper weight. That's why modern companies are so skittish about R&D.

    --
    "Be particularly skeptical when presented with evidence confirming what you already believe." -
  4. Re:Applications? by rogoshen1 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Engineers come from all walks of life, and don't usually wear signs that say "Hello, my name is engineer". You could have been near one at the grocery store, on the bus, or in line at Starbucks. So my question is, how do you *know* for certain you aren't near an engineer, right now?

  5. Re:What's the temperature of molten lava? by pecosdave · · Score: 2

    Now THIS would be interesting.

    Think about it, complete a Dyson's Sphere of this stuff around the sun, in time it is likely to melt a hole in it or blow out a side. When the side blows out the sun is doing what? Creating pressure in the remainder of the cylinder. Assuming we have the technology to pull this off I'm going to assume we have the technology to position the hole as we desire - a rocket propelled steerable solar system. Sure there would be planets freezing during the covered times, until they're cooked in the jet's exhaust wake during that part of their orbit, assuming they could remain in orbit, but it would be cool none the less.

    --
    The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
  6. Practical concerns by Locke2005 · · Score: 2

    Is this kind of liking finding an acid that will dissolve any substance -- what do you store it in? Exactly what do you use as a cauldron for forging parts with the substance with the highest melting point ever? (Yeah, probably magnetic containment.) Regardless, it seems rather difficult to make anything out of this stuff; if it was easy, they have produced a working sample, instead of a theoretical substance based on a computer simulation.

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  7. Re:Applications? by Locke2005 · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Nowhere near an engineer"... so, you're riding in the caboose, then?

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  8. Re:What's the temperature of molten lava? by shess · · Score: 3, Interesting

    a rocket propelled steerable solar system

    Unfortunately you're propelling the shell, not the star.

  9. Re:Melting is for cows. by rubycodez · · Score: 4, Funny

    You keep milking that cheesy cow fetish whey too much.

  10. Re:What's the temperature of molten lava? by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 2

    " a rocket propelled steerable solar system."

    Have fun filing an environmental impact statement for that thing. It would contain so much paper that for the first time, the environmental impact statement would require a second environmental impact statement, for itself.

  11. Incandescant lights? by calidoscope · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm guessing the material should be quite happy to sit at 4000K, which would make for a much higher luminous efficiency than tungsten. Kind of like a 21st century version of the Nernst lamp (which was twice as efficient as a carbon filament, but half of tungsten's efficiency).

    --
    A Shadeless room is a brighter room.
  12. Re:Applications? by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 2

    And many of them can be assumed to be spherical.

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  13. Re:What's the temperature of molten lava? by p0p0 · · Score: 2

    It's environmental impact statements all the way down.

  14. Re:Perhaps this can get us further down? by thinkwaitfast · · Score: 2

    Turtles

  15. Re:Perhaps this can get us further down? by Keybounce · · Score: 2

    No, if you did deeper, you'll find the horrors that Jon Pertwee's Doctor was trying to save us from, by stopping the crust penetrating drill.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...