Graphene Super Paper Is 10x Stronger Than Steel 244
Elliot Chang writes "The University of Technology in Sydney recently unveiled a new type of graphene nano paper that is ten times stronger than a sheet of steel. Composed of processed and pressed graphite, the material is as thin as a sheet of paper yet incredible durable — this strength and thinness gives it remarkable applications in many industries, and it is completely recyclable to boot."
Re:The Strength of Compressed Graphite? (Score:3, Insightful)
I always hate "stronger". What does it mean? Tensile strength? Compression? What metric are they claiming "10 times stronger".
Re:The Strength of Compressed Graphite? (Score:2, Insightful)
Then put it in the summary. When I see such a liteweight summary in scientifc terms, I don't bother to read on. I get innudated with tons of "information" and can only be arsed to read on if I have confidence in the value of what I am going to read.
Re:Rate of degrading? (Score:5, Insightful)
Also, this may be ten times stronger than steel, but it is still carbon, which makes it ten times more combustible than steel as well.
Sort of like diamonds are ten times more combustible than steel wool.
I don't think it's quite that simple...
Starts expensive, gets cheaper (Score:5, Insightful)
Steel is the most recycled material on the planet. It is also plenty strong for most applications. So my question is, how much does this super-nano-paper cost? That will be key in its success.
Steel was once incredibly expensive, a rarity only kings/warlords possessed. Aluminum was once so expensive it was mainly used in the luxury goods of the rich. I think the key to success is usefulness. Cost has more to do with how quickly that success occurs.
Summary (Score:5, Insightful)
Do you understand the concept of "summary"? If this were a blog about materials engineering, I might agree with you that such detail is needed. As it is, most people here probably read the summary, thought, "Cool!" and continued reading other articles. Had they had more detailed information, they would have read the summary, thought, "Um... Okay..." and continued reading other articles.
If you're counting on Slashdot to give you detailed technical information in its summaries, perhaps you're reading the wrong blog. If you happen to be a materials engineer and want more detailed technical information, well, that's what TFA is for. The article, which, incidentally, is actually yet another summary of another article [uts.edu.au] from the University of Technology in Sydney, which is a summary of an article [aip.org] in the Journal of Applied Physics, which in turn is a summary of probably a very detailed thesis or dissertation backed by metric craptons of research data by Ali R. Ranjbartoreh, Bei Wang, Xiaoping Shen, and Guoxiu Wang.
See how it works? You start with "10 times stronger!" and it's up to you to dig as deeply as you want to in order to find the level of technical detail and/or interest that suits you. Personally, given that I'm not a materials engineer and that "10 times stronger!" is good enough to suit my level of interest and make me say, "Cool!", I'm actually glad that more technical details were not provided.