Move over carbon fiber
 

Michelle Shen
USA TODAY

MIT researchers have developed a new material that’s as strong as steel but as light as plastic.

It can be easily manufactured in large quantities, and the use cases range from lightweight coatings for cars and phones to building blocks for massive structures such as bridges, according to Michael Strano, the Carbon P. Dubbs Professor of Chemical Engineering at MIT and the senior author of a new study.

'We don’t usually think of plastics as being something that you could use to support a building, but with this material, you can enable new things,' he said in a statement from MIT.

The material is several times stronger than bulletproof glass, and the amount of force needed to break it is twice that of steel, despite the fact that the material has only about one-sixth the density of steel, according to MIT.

The researchers were able to do this by developing a new process to form polymers. Plastics are an example of polymers, along with rubber and glass.

The researchers wanted to see whether they could create a two-dimensional version of a polymer that could remain flat, thus making it lightweight. They tried for decades to create such a material, and the new process they developed was published in peer-reviewed journal Nature last week.

Polymers are essentially chains of individual molecules, called monomers, linked together by chemical bonds. Normally, when polymers are formed, they expand into three-dimensional objects, like how a sheet cake rises as it bakes in an oven. The challenge is if even one monomer begins to rotate, the polymer becomes three-dimensional.

For example, imagine if you wanted to line up children and pack a bunch of them in an auditorium by having them link arms. However, if even one of the children choose to be unruly and shift around, it would be impossible to maintain order.
Link to article


Dan

Will be exciting to see industrial applications, for sure!

UCI will still have 6.8KG minimum weight

Cue the "Steel is Real" folks ; )

How about cue the "show me a proof of concept bike" at least before comparing it to other materials.

May be be a bit too early to extol the virtues of the "2 Dimensional Version of a Polymer" bike.

BTW, did anyone else suspect this was a joke when they saw the name "Carbon P. Dubbs"? I had to google that:
https://digging-history.com/2016/01/...-riches-story/

Real guy, really funny name.

It will cost a zillion dollars too !! But maybe they can give it a cool name that something rhymes with so we have another saying to throw around !!

Well, it is a plastic. That rhymes with spastic and fantastic, so it could go either way.

Drastic and elastic may or may not fit.

According to the article, it's supposed to be cheap, btw.

how easy will it be to patch or repair, of it can be?

How much of an impact with UV have on an exposed untreated or non-painted surface?

How will it feel riding it?

I did note that they described it as useful for a lightweight coating for cars, but also (presumably) load-bearing bridge "building blocks." Anyone versed enough in materials science to recognize anything significant from that seemingly odd pairing?

It's interesting but, of course, people have to recognize that we're all just speculating based on almost no knowledge of the material, and absolutely zero knowledge of its compatibility with different production techniques.

For example, I'd love to know if this is useable in 3D printing--that could mean inexpensive bespoke frames.

Comments about frame material through history…
1830s - “My good sir…I can’t believe you’re still riding one of those wooden velocipedes. Steel is real!”
1930s - “I do say…I can’t believe you’re not riding a chromoly frame yet.”
1990s - “Bro, I can’t believe you’re not riding an aluminum frame yet.”
2000s - “Like shouldn’t you be be riding a carbon fiber frame now, dude?’
2040s - “Where’s your plastic polymer bike?”

The truth is, a bicycle is one of the more primitive devices out there.

For all the technological advancements in frame materials we are still using a steel chain to steel cogs for the overwhelmingly majority of bikes. Despite all the space age developments, function still revolves around the weakest quick link.

John

Still waiting on nanotubes and Buckyballs.

But they are refined to the nth degree. Enough that you can easily identify a distinct timeline of development, especially at the top end of the market.

Edit: Except for FDs, which are still very primitive contraptions!

Plus the drive train design is an extremely efficient match for the engine, and no one is coming up with a redesign of the engine anytime soon.

There is a driveshaft option to the chain drive. I’d think this (the gears) lasts somewhat longer. Obviously not very popular. — Dan

https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...3e84e9541.jpeg

hush and eat your graphene

Steel and concrete are really, really cheap. When this stuff is stronger per dollar then it will be important for anything other than aerospace and sporting goods

Yeah, there's a long, sad history of failures with the shaft drive concept. Remember CeramicSpeed showing off their shaft drive prototype a couple years ago? They've now spun it off into a new company "Driven" which is now crowd funded. They claim they're planning on having an actual product by 2023, but I'm skeptical..

I suppose since it's just in the lab we should all pack it in and go back to talking about the same typical Bikeforums troll questions asked the 1000th time or some kind of really Fred topic such as trying to race people on group rides with tt bars. You know, instead of speculate about something new and different for once.

Plastic is fantastic:p

But there is probably some advantage to be found in working your way through the peleton.

John

schedule II substances provided a lot of reshaping for the engine, just that its use is frowned upon.

Emerson, Lake, and Palmer sing about plastic fantastic.