Space Elevators, Ho! - carbon nanotube growth breakthrough!

noosfractal · 2007-11-13 19:16:49

The ultrastrong, lightweight carbon-nanotube fiber, branded SuperThread(tm) by the company, can have better properties than steel for many applications and could soon be the primary substance from which airplanes, automobile parts, and sports equipment are made. Initial tests show that SuperThread is pound for pound (for the same weight) one-hundred times stronger than steel and less than one-fortieth the weight.
http://www.lanl.gov/news/index.php?fuse … ry_id=8855
8)

Finally an update ...

http://www.cnt-tech.com/

Check out their nice powerpoint. Highlights ...

+ Image of a fiber on a spool - these guys are way past 18mm stacks.

+ Achieved 5.3 times the tensile strength of T1000 fiber, which is approx 15 M Pa m^3 / kg, or 30% of the minimum economically viable figure for the space elevator put forward by liftport

+ Quote a price of ~$3000/ft

+ "The Pilot Plant will be operational 15 –18 months following funding and will produce 2 to 5 kilograms per day of CNT fiber."

+ "Once sufficient application and demand is established, CNT Technologies will construct a major production facility in the United States. All CNT “base” fiber will be produced in the USA."

30% of the required strength and it is only 2007. We just may have a shot at this.

By the way, this is _full_ strength required for the Martian space elevator, with generous safety factor.

Tom Kalbfus · 2007-11-14 09:47:17

Too bad we aren't Martians.

I put my hope in two things, scramjets and space elevators. One of the most frusterating things about this Space Age is how it requires government funding. I get tired of space vehicles getting halted for every little thing. There's a scratch on one of the tiles, so the launch gets scrubbed etc. It would be nice if we had more reliable technology that operated more consistently. I would like to see space travel become a common experience for all sorts of people, and not just something we watch and read about in the news. Its been 50 years and rockets just aren't cutting it. NASA's Design Reference Mission, set in 2031 assumes that we continue to rely on expensive rockets, in a sense it would be a shame if we didn't have something better. I think a space elevator could open up colonization of space in a way that the Shuttle has so far failed to do.

cIclops · 2007-11-15 02:46:35

Finally an update ...
http://www.cnt-tech.com/
Check out their nice powerpoint. Highlights ...
+ Image of a fiber on a spool - these guys are way past 18mm stacks.
+ Achieved 5.3 times the tensile strength of T1000 fiber, which is approx 15 M Pa m^3 / kg, or 30% of the minimum economically viable figure for the space elevator put forward by liftport
+ Quote a price of ~$3000/ft
+ "The Pilot Plant will be operational 15 –18 months following funding and will produce 2 to 5 kilograms per day of CNT fiber."
+ "Once sufficient application and demand is established, CNT Technologies will construct a major production facility in the United States. All CNT “base” fiber will be produced in the USA."
30% of the required strength and it is only 2007. We just may have a shot at this.
By the way, this is _full_ strength required for the Martian space elevator, with generous safety factor.

Thanks for posting those details, my browser refused to display that page!

A few points.

Why do they quote the tensile strength in terms of another fiber and only give a number approximately?

$3000 per foot, for a single thread? That is an astronomic price, maybe because they have only produced tiny quantities so far.

Will they be able to get the extra 70% strength from this technology?

If this is all true, it's a BIG step forward!

(noosfractal i've copied your message here)

noosfractal · 2007-11-15 08:13:50

Thanks for posting those details, my browser refused to display that page!

Yeah, I had to open up IE, which I very rarely do.

Why do they quote the tensile strength in terms of another fiber and only give a number approximately?

T1000 is their closest competitor in terms of tensile strength. M70J is closest in terms of stiffness. It's kinda natural to compare. Here is a more detailed table ...

Fiber -- Density (g/cm 3) -- Specific Strength (x 10 cm) -- Specific Modulus (x 10 cm) -- Toughness (J/g) -- Fiber Cost est. $/ft
T1000 -- 1.8 -- 33.3 -- 14.0 -- 38.8 -- 3,332
M70J -- 1.93 -- 16.7 -- 32.7 -- 4.2 -- 1,638
CNT Fiber -- 0.18-0.3 -- 172.7 -- 137.6 -- 316 -- 3,125

... but I'd distrust anything outside of 2 significant figures anyway. With this sort of thing, the exact figures vary by the batch at this stage.

$3000 per foot, for a single thread? That is an astronomic price, maybe because they have only produced tiny quantities so far.

Looks like it is comparable to the T1000 fiber. I'm sure that isn't their cost of production. But hey, they have capital to raise!

Will they be able to get the extra 70% strength from this technology?

It's possible. I'd put it at 1 in 100 chance right now.

If this is all true, it's a BIG step forward!

These guys came out of Los Alamos National Laboratory (lanl.gov), so I don't think it's a scam. Also their presentation materials are so awful - they are definitely scientists

cIclops · 2007-11-15 11:25:02

Those numbers are astonishing, copying over to the SE thread (apologies for the pun)

Tom Kalbfus · 2007-11-15 16:42:12

Those numbers are astonishing, copying over to the SE thread (apologies for the pun)

Someday, I think this is going to nip the naysayers in the bud, they will continue with their 100-year plans for setting up the first Mars Bases, with Congressional funding continuing X billion dollars per year to keep foup people on Mars. I am not really interested in an "Antarctic Research Station" type Mars base, but in setting up a real community with an economic basis rather than something funded expensively with US tax dollars indefinitely.

cIclops · 2007-11-17 05:54:55

Someday, I think this is going to nip the naysayers in the bud, they will continue with their 100-year plans for setting up the first Mars Bases, with Congressional funding continuing X billion dollars per year to keep foup people on Mars. I am not really interested in an "Antarctic Research Station" type Mars base, but in setting up a real community with an economic basis rather than something funded expensively with US tax dollars indefinitely.

Who has a 100 year plan? Right now NASA have no plan at all to setup any kind of base on Mars, only ideas. They are doing a study of the architecture needed to get to Mars and building the first elements of a transportation system (Ares I/Orion) and of course a lot of robotic exploration, but that's all.

It's a gigantic step from even the Moon to Mars, and an even bigger one to setup a real community there. It will take many many small steps including the Moon and probably NEOs to reach Mars. An Outpost will be the first one on Mars, then probably a permanent base, and then a colony, but nobody knows when.

Tom Kalbfus · 2007-11-18 11:33:15

Pray tell me, what is the difference between an outpost and a base on Mars? If the outpost has to support humans on Mars for two years, isn't that the same thing as a base?

Why not set up a base on Mission One? Pick a nice central location such as Valles Marineris and build a base right there. There are alot of interesting geologic features in that area, a nice location at 70 degrees west and 0 latitude would put the base within easy reach of the Marineris system, and if one wishes, they can visit the giant shield volcanoes to the west. I think with each mission and addition of a hab, the base will be enlarged. Some long range rovers can be delivered with seperate Ares V launches and as the base becomes more and more capable, the crew can venture further and further out. Why waste time and resources by sending throwaway outposts, when the base can be designed and planned on Earth. If they wish to set up a second base, they can use the first base as a staging area.

Another thought occured to me, why not send a permanent crew and save the cost of returning each crew to Earth. That way they can be colonist/explorers. resupply ships can be sent at regular 26 month intervals and as the base expands we could add more crew. It is much cheaper to send just things to Mars than people and have to operate a temporary space station to keep them alive in transit. If local resources can be utilized, each replacement could be worth two crewmembers that stayed for another 26 months resupply flights are cheaper than crewed transfer vehicles.

Terraformer · 2007-11-18 12:21:34

That idea's been suggested before.

cIclops · 2007-11-18 12:54:18

Pray tell me, what is the difference between an outpost and a base on Mars? If the outpost has to support humans on Mars for two years, isn't that the same thing as a base?

A base is bigger

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#26 2007-11-13 19:16:49

Re: Space Elevators, Ho! - carbon nanotube growth breakthrough!

#27 2007-11-14 09:47:17

Re: Space Elevators, Ho! - carbon nanotube growth breakthrough!

#28 2007-11-15 02:46:35

Re: Space Elevators, Ho! - carbon nanotube growth breakthrough!

#29 2007-11-15 08:13:50

Re: Space Elevators, Ho! - carbon nanotube growth breakthrough!

#30 2007-11-15 11:25:02

Re: Space Elevators, Ho! - carbon nanotube growth breakthrough!

#31 2007-11-15 16:42:12

Re: Space Elevators, Ho! - carbon nanotube growth breakthrough!

#32 2007-11-17 05:54:55

Re: Space Elevators, Ho! - carbon nanotube growth breakthrough!

#33 2007-11-18 11:33:15

Re: Space Elevators, Ho! - carbon nanotube growth breakthrough!

#34 2007-11-18 12:21:34

Re: Space Elevators, Ho! - carbon nanotube growth breakthrough!

#35 2007-11-18 12:54:18

Re: Space Elevators, Ho! - carbon nanotube growth breakthrough!

Board footer