• Justin
    link
    fedilink
    English
    317 hours ago

    It would probably be strong enough, but not viable to manufacture.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      45 hours ago

      Extreme doubt on strong enough. The author of this article barely understands the words they are using. Cool it strain hardens, so do so many other materials. Cool it’s tough like many other materials. Wow it has more links than others. No actual numbers about toughness, yield, ultimate strength, cycle limits, etc. It’s great research, but it absolutely isn’t going to magically solve the space elevator issue.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          2
          edit-2
          3 hours ago

          Any company will market that its ideas are possible. The article you linked is promising, but take it with a huge grain of salt. They are moving the goalposts the whole article. Flat graphene is a great material for space elevators, but it can’t currently be created without defects. Polycrystaline means the graphene created includes defects sort of. It means the graphene they created that is km’s long has shitloads of places where cycle loading will cause it to fail way under (like 10%) of its expected load carrying capacity.

          Edit: I want this technology to exist. My MS in mechanical engineering focused in materials science tells me we are quite far from it happening.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1014 hours ago

      “the manufacturing process of the 2D polymer is highly scalable”

      First line of the article