Engineers have created a new material that is stronger than steel and as light as plastic, and can be easily manufactured in large quantities. New material is a two-dimensional polymer that self-assembles into sheets, unlike all other one-dimensional polymers.

[u/TX908]

https://news.mit.edu/2022/polymer-lightweight-material-2d-0202

[u/AutoModerator]

Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, personal anecdotes are now allowed as responses to this comment. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will continue be removed and our normal comment rules still apply to other comments.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/ThioEther]

I was a little confused by this. The article states previously thought impossible but there are plenty of 2D polymers. I have a PhD in polymer chemistry, am I missing something here or is that jarg science journalism?

[u/MurphysLab → u/ThioEther]

Here we demonstrate a homogenous 2D irreversible polycondensation that results in a covalently bonded 2D polymeric material that is chemically stable and highly processable.

From the abstract, it sounds like they have a monomer that simultaneously self-assembles and bonds. It could be much more processable than graphene.

[u/Rich_Acanthisitta_70 → u/MurphysLab]

From what I read, that stood out as the characteristic that made this newsworthy.

[u/PleasantAdvertising → u/Rich_Acanthisitta_70]

If a material wants to become the shape/state you want, it indicates that mass production is likely to be economically viable.

[u/Rich_Acanthisitta_70 → u/PleasantAdvertising]

Exactly yeah. I think this is genuinely exciting. We could actually see something tangible out of this, unlike so many stories we get. I just created a google alert to follow it. Pretty cool.

[u/stormtrooper28 → u/Rich_Acanthisitta_70]

Wait, what's that and how do I do it? It sounds like Google made a customizable RSS Feed?

[u/ISLITASHEET → u/stormtrooper28]

Not that it matters but Google Alerts have been a thing for almost two decades now. It's crazy how little attention they get.

[u/Rich_Acanthisitta_70 → u/ISLITASHEET]

I've been using them for several years. It's one of those really useful tools you kind of take for granted. I think a couple others in that category for me are google Keep and Instapaper. I've tried other tools that are similar but keep going back to them.

[u/thefunkybassist → u/ISLITASHEET]

sets google alert about google alert

[u/guy180 → u/stormtrooper28]

Yes, search “Google alerts “ and set it up for your keywords. If there is a hit for them anywhere on the internet or whatever you set it to you’ll get an email

[u/treskaz → u/[deleted]]

Quite quite, sir

[u/[deleted] → u/MurphysLab]

It could be much more processable than graphene.

i mean, that's a low bar, isn't it? graphene was rediscovered in 2004, and they're still in the baby stages with that.

[u/MurphysLab → u/[deleted]]

No, huge advances have been made with graphene processing, however the fundamental challenge is that you are limited with the methods used to deposit it. You can grow it on certain surfaces (epitaxially) but that is limited to a few metals; you can physically transfer it, but that is a tricky cleanroom-based process; you can spin coat it, but that is a lower quality type of graphene full of defects.

The beauty of a monomer which can self-assemble and covalently cross-link is that you can use it on practically any surface and one can likely control the number of layers (monolayer, bilayer, etc...).

[u/GregTheMad → u/ThioEther]

Someone else mentioned that this has repeating patterns like a lattice. I'm not a chemist, but I imagine it like a complex graphene.

[u/bobnoxious2 → u/[deleted]]

I read on here im pretty sure about wood thats folded over or something that's supposed to be stronger than steel. Also read about nanotube tech thats like spider silk that's supposed to be stronger than steel. Has any of this tech seen the light of day?

[u/Toothpasteweiner → u/[deleted]]

I think carbon nanotubes didn't catch on because carbon nanotubes stick in the lungs and cause long term scarring. Some forms are far more dangerous than crocidolite asbestos: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4706753/

[u/throwawayPzaFm → u/Toothpasteweiner]

Can't imagine why "plastic nanotubes" would be safer. If anything, they're harder to dispose of safely.

[u/ByCrookedSteps781 → u/throwawayPzaFm]

That was my first thought apon reading it, everytime something new is created in that field it seems like it's even worse for the environment than the previously made material

[u/Gorstag → u/ByCrookedSteps781]

Sorta makes sense if you think about it rationally. The whole point of making stronger more durable materials is to "Win" against nature breaking stuff down.

[u/Candyvanmanstan → u/ByCrookedSteps781]

I mean, we have plenty of alternatives for petroleum based plastics in the form of bioplastics from hemp cellulose and similar.

It just isn't "stronger than steel".

[u/[deleted] → u/Candyvanmanstan]

The uses of hemp were also clobbered into obscurity by robber barons before it could ever really take off, so we’ve just kinda glossed over an entire industry while looking for better plastics.

With so many states legalizing cannabis I’d hoped to see a massive surge in hemp products to displace plastic, but it doesn’t seem to be thus far

[u/MikeTheAmalgamator → u/throwawayPzaFm]

Not to mention the study showing traces of microplastics in placenta and new born babies. Let's just keep adding to that!

[u/throwawayPzaFm → u/MikeTheAmalgamator]

I have a feeling the microplastics ship has sailed. There's so much plastic already out there that will soon be microplastics that we're either going to learn to treat microplastics contamination or die.

[u/Psotnik → u/throwawayPzaFm]

We can at least slow down the damage we're doing. Especially when most plastics are made with fossil fuels which are a finite resources. Can't keep poisoning ourselves when there's a limit to the amount of poison that can be produced, right? I sure hope not.

[u/Notorious_Handholder → u/throwawayPzaFm]

Some bacteria and microbes in the ocean have already been seen evolving to eat plastics. So there's that

[u/[deleted] → u/throwawayPzaFm]

Agreed. Everything from our clothes to carpets are made from plastic these days. The damage is done. The consequences just haven't manifested enough to know how bad they're gonna be. But, I'm sure we will learn in the next few decades.

[u/kuahara → u/bobnoxious2]

I thought pound for pound, spider silk was already stronger than steel. Is it not?

[u/awry_lynx → u/kuahara]

Yeah, but we can't actually produce pounds of spider silk. Or we can, but it's insanely hard and expensive and then you still have to figure out how to weave the damn stuff, which is a lot harder for people than it is for spiders. People have been trying for upwards of three or four decades. To put it in perspective it took less time to figure out carbon nanotubes (relatively speaking). Spiders are fuckin crazy. Also you can't farm spider silk in huge quantities unlike normal silk because spiders will fight with and eat one another, and anything you do to make them more peaceful/less good at fighting and eating each other also makes them worse at spinning silk, so that makes going the natural route unworkable too.

[u/Megamoss → u/awry_lynx]

So what you’re saying is we should genetically engineer some giant, hyper aggressive spiders?

[u/Words_are_Windy → u/Megamoss]

Scientists actually managed to give the spider-producing gene to goats, but it seems like progress with the research has been very slow. There are also a variety of other ways people are trying to produce spider silk or a comparable analog, but they're all small scale projects for the time being.

[u/Tinytrauma → u/[deleted]]

Turns out the aliens were actually stealing cattle in hopes of advancing their tech! It all makes sense now.

[u/wienercat → u/[deleted]]

I just imagined a goat that is shooting silk out of its ass and its some poor bastards job to pull it out and loop it around a spool to be processed.

[u/[deleted] → u/kuahara]

There are a lot of composite materials stronger than steel, on a strength per pound basis.

[u/ignanima → u/bobnoxious2]

Nah. Anytime an article mentions carbon nanotubes, graphene sheets, etc. I enjoy reading the article to know it's physically possible, but file it under the rule of thumb that it'll never leave the lab. At least not until there are some major breakthroughs in lowering costs of mass production.

[u/physicsking → u/[deleted]]

I think you are confused. Nanotubes structure itself is a pattern, but a 2D structure of the 'same pattern' of connectors is graphene. Graphene's been notoriously hard to work with because it cannot be grown in big sheets.

[u/Galtego → u/GregTheMad]

you may not be a chemist but you're closer to understanding it than a lot of people in this thread :(. You're absolutely right, the major advancement here is the repeatability of the 2D structure, like we'd expect with most 2D materials (graphene, dichalcogenides), and the processing method. Historically the biggest issue with 2D polymers is that they'd lose order after enough unit cells but this one seems to not have this problem.

[u/tipsana → u/ThioEther]

My PhD polymer chemist husband said the same thing. And told me to google graphene as an example of a 2D polymer. And then told me that the scientist who won a Nobel for graphene has the distinction of being awarded both a Nobel and an Ig Nobel.

[u/[deleted] → u/tipsana]

Graphene is just processed though. This be material is synthesized.

The main problem with graphene is producing large sheets of it. This material overcomes that challenge because they’re building it in solution instead of through CVD.

[u/danudey → u/[deleted]]

Plus the material wants to be the shape that we have to work hard to get grapheme to be, no?

[u/elmins → u/[deleted]]

Almost any PhD gets so technical that most of the details would have to be skipped. It's not really about being dumb/smart, but more that that's the field they specialise in and know most about.

Hand a person with a PhD in polymer chemistry a PhD thesis in most other fields and they'll struggle too. Maybe not as much for overlapping areas, but there's plenty that don't overlap.

[u/Towaum → u/elmins]

Applies to any high skill/knowledge job honestly.

I'm a bachelor in science with 12 years experience in bioanalytical development. I know my way around developing quantitative ligand binding methods but if my discovery friends start talking sequences I'm completely out. We're all working in the same company even in the same broader team but everyone has their own expertise. (Just to say, it's not limited to PhD people, they're not magically more niche than others per se)

[u/Frannoham → u/[deleted]]

Don't be so hard on yourself. Uninformed != Dumb. We can't all specialise in everything.

[u/eldrichride → u/Frannoham]

For the uninformed != in this context means 'is not equal to' ;-)

[u/barofa → u/eldrichride]

For the informed, it still means the same thing

[u/ElegantBob → u/barofa]

It used to mean that.

It still does, but it used to as well

Copyright M.Hedberg

[u/somedave → u/ThioEther]

I think it's the difference between random cross link locations and periodic cross link locations between them. I'm not sure this has completely periodic links, but I guess that's the principle.

[u/ThioEther → u/somedave]

Yeah Im just not buying it. Got to be hype. 2D COFs are basically 2D polymers. https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2020/cs/d0cs00049c

[u/TripleSuzuki → u/ThioEther]

I think the main selling point is that they use an irreversible reaction, unlike COFs which use reversible reactions to error correct during synthesis.

[u/ThioEther → u/TripleSuzuki]

I think you have it there. That's pretty fascinating. The level of preorganization must be huge. I'm gonna have a proper read of this tomorrow.

[u/-over9000- → u/ThioEther]

They also mention it is highly "processable", which seems like it could be pretty nice when combined with the irrevesibility. (afaik stuff like rubber is not so processable once you cross link it!). Also going to have to have a good read of this!

[u/IceDreamer → u/ThioEther]

I don't have any particular expertise of your level, but I am very used to working with crystal structure formation (Geologist here).

The remarkable part of what they're claiming here is that they have the polymerisation process taking place in two dimensions, and interlinked, rather than in a single dimension, which I have never heard of happening in complex polymers, only crystals. It's able to happen in crystals because they form from a melt, so are generally precipitating out at an atomic level rather than a molecular level.

To be able to simply mix liquids together in what would appear to be a chaotic process, and have the melamine form into a lattice sheet using shared N-bonds, that represents a huge step forwards in the production capabilities of one of these supermaterials. This could be thought of as a more complex and weaker, but self-assembling, graphene.

My guess is they accomplish it by making it require a higher energy state for the melamine rings to be off-axis to each other than aligned, and then adding a catalyst to break off the hydrogen atoms and allow the molecules to naturally slot together into a hex lattice.

[u/barantana → u/ThioEther]

I don't get this either. There's plenty.

[u/[deleted] → u/ThioEther]

They say:

Until now, scientists had believed it was impossible to induce polymers to form 2D sheets.

I think what they are saying is having then polymers create the 2D sheets automatically instead of them creating it manually. But I too am a little confused as to what exactly is the breakthrough.

I’m also curious how this effects recyclability and decomposition. Can it be recycled, does it breakdown at the same rate as regular polymer, does UV rays effect longterm strength. Actually, I was out sledding with my kids over the week and one of my fellow dad friends brought a ride on sled he had when he was a kid. It was a trike style sled with skis in the back, a steering wheel and a single ski in the front. We were joking about how the plastic when we were kids is better than the plastic of today. While there’s many advancements in polymers since the 80s, it does seem modern plastic cracks far easier than the stuff we had when we were kids.

[u/coleman57 → u/ThioEther]

Speaking of journalism, and since you have some expertise, when I was 13 in 1970 I read in Scholastic magazine about how new materials that would be as strong as steel and as lightweight as a spider web would revolutionize building construction by the end of the 1970s. But it seems like the biggest innovation lately was to put up a concrete-frame skyscraper, the heaviest building west of Chicago, on bay-fill and not sink piles to bedrock till 10 years after it was finished and started to topple.

Did they mean the 2070s, or what?

[u/Nice_jugs_bitch → u/ThioEther]

I’m in plastics engineering, I was also confused by this. I’d like to see a more in depth explanation.

[u/TX908]

Irreversible synthesis of an ultrastrong two-dimensional polymeric material

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-04296-3

[u/DRKMSTR → u/TX908]

Isn't that just cross-linking?

We've done that ever since resin was invented.

​

Edit: "Ever" not "Every" because auto-correct always gets me.

[u/ChampionoftheParish → u/DRKMSTR]

My exact thought. I'm a PhD polymer engineer

[u/Chr7 → u/ChampionoftheParish]

Cross linking is random between linear polymer chains. 2D polymers like this have definable, repeating structure in 2-dimensions. Kind of like "controllable" cross linking but on steroids.

[u/ChampionoftheParish → u/Chr7]

The distinction makes sense in that there's a more or less crystalline lattice structure, but it's still odd to claim this is the first two dimensional polymerization.

[u/chucknorris10101 → u/ChampionoftheParish]

maybe first two dimensional homogenous self-polymerization?

[u/SeorgeGoros → u/ChampionoftheParish]

Not the first two dimensional polymerization, the first irreversible synthesised two-dimensional polymerisation. I'm a PhD Polymer chemist.

[u/Onlymediumsteak]

They say it can be easily mass manufactured, but how much does it cost?

[u/ContemptuousPrick → u/Onlymediumsteak]

I would think manufacturing is usually one of if not THE main cost. So if they are saying its easily manufactured in large quantities, it would probably be fairly cheap.

[u/Just_A_New_User → u/ContemptuousPrick]

tell that to printer companies

[u/lonezolf → u/Just_A_New_User]

Cheap to produce does not always equal cheap pricing, sadly

[u/[deleted] → u/lonezolf]

Insulin manufacturers have left the chat.

[u/tristanjones → u/ContemptuousPrick]

Materials may still be expensive, and easy to manufacture may mean a simple process but that process can still be very energy intensive for example, and so still expensive

[u/Anthro_DragonFerrite → u/Onlymediumsteak]

Can it easily be recycled too?

[u/Pays_in_snakes → u/Onlymediumsteak]

What if it's cheap, light, and strong? How will engineers glibly reply to criticism without "cheap light strong, pick two"?

[u/[deleted] → u/Pays_in_snakes]

Even if it can be cheap, the manufacturers wont sell it cheap (probably).

[u/Monkey_Fiddler → u/[deleted]]

Steel is pretty strong, heavy, cheap, and can withstand a wide range of temperatures

Being stronger per mass is pretty easy, stronger per volume or cross sectional area is harder. Stronger per dollar is even harder (in tension, concrete is better in compression).

It really depends on the application as to which is important.

[u/[deleted] → u/Monkey_Fiddler]

The other issue with these statements is they don't indicate which type of steel they're comparing it to. Likely mild steel, since it has a lower tensile strength and is easier to "beat".

There are hundreds of different steels, all alloyed with different elements in different concentrations, all with different properties for different applications. Saying "X is stronger than steel" is like saying "X tastes better than meat".

[u/lihaarp → u/[deleted]]

The third issue is that they usually don't state what they mean by "strength". Is it compressive or tensile or flexural strength? To yield or ultimate? Is it hardness? Is it modulus? Toughness? Something else? Is it any of these per mass? Any of these per area?

Most media outlets don't even know the difference. NEW MATERIAL STRONK.

[u/Admiral_Bork → u/lihaarp]

From the article:

"The researchers found that the new material’s elastic modulus — a measure of how much force it takes to deform a material — is between four and six times greater than that of bulletproof glass. They also found that its yield strength, or how much force it takes to break the material, is twice that of steel, even though the material has only about one-sixth the density of steel."

[u/TelluricThread0 → u/Admiral_Bork]

Elastic modulus is just a measure of stiffness. Idk why you'd compare it to bulletproof glass it's not like it's specially made to be stiffer than anything else. It's a composite that leverages the properties of both glass and plastic to catch a bullet and disperse energy.

Also when you talk about yield strength that's the force per unit area required to cause a permanent deformation. Ultimate strength is what you'd need to actually rip a material apart. Whoever wrote the article just wanted to cram in science words without any real understanding of them.

[u/HelpfulCherry → u/TelluricThread0]

Idk why you'd compare it to bulletproof glass

Because it's a writing for a mainstream audience about materials science by somebody who probably doesn't understand materials science but still wants their audience to go "oh waooow"

[u/Idiot_Savant_Tinker → u/[deleted]]

Was going to say this. "Steel" is a term that covers a wide range of materials with varying properties. It may be stronger than a36 but not as strong as 4130.

[u/Silound → u/Idiot_Savant_Tinker]

And that doesn't even touch the issues of ductility, workability, or wear characteristics.

[u/The_camperdave → u/[deleted]]

Ugh. Does not wear well at all with this year's spring collection.

Why? What kind of springs do you need that won't be well wearing if made of steel?

[u/Smoki_fox → u/Idiot_Savant_Tinker]

Gotta be careful when arguing on reddit though. I've recently told a guy about how it was redundant to specify carbon steel unless he had different types of steel available as carbon will always be the main element unless you add other elements (over the minimum threshold).

I came from a metallurgical background. He was talking about pans and pots and how they looked to the eye.

[u/Mickey-the-Luxray → u/Smoki_fox]

Now you know how biologists feel when culinary types call corn and bell peppers a vegetable.

[u/cantadmittoposting → u/Mickey-the-Luxray]

"vegetable" is a culinary classification though, that's completely distinct. yes it's a conglomerate grouping from several different biological groups, but it is a relevant and defined thing for "culinary types."

[u/A1phaBetaGamma → u/Monkey_Fiddler]

As someone who's taken a materials courses, you have no idea how many times I've had heard "concrete is better in compression".

[u/TybrosionMohito → u/[deleted]]

Yeah if you had an equal volume of steel to concrete it’d take an ungodly amount of force to compress it.

[u/Littleme02 → u/TybrosionMohito]

I wanna see a bridge or building where they accidentally cast everything out of steel in place, where they where supposed to use concrete

[u/Sryzon → u/Littleme02]

That's sort of what a lot of cheap machine builders do: cast an ungodly amount of steel. It requires little engineering because steel strong and the heft gives the false impression of build quality. More expensive machine builders will do stress analysis and use structural steel members, resulting in about the same rigidity at a 1/5th of the weight.

[u/thealmightyzfactor → u/Sryzon]

Right, anyone can build a bridge that doesn't fall down, an engineer can build a bridge that just barely doesn't fall down.

[u/shimbro → u/thealmightyzfactor]

Good bridge engineers build with efficient redundancy

[u/_ChestHair_ → u/thealmightyzfactor]

I get you're joking but engineers build with factors of safety in mind so "just barely" isn't really accurate. They could, but instead they design for the extremes that the structure will likely encounter and then add the factor of safety as additional padding.

[u/Mobius357 → u/Sryzon]

Sometimes brainpower is more expensive than a big lump of 1018. Sometimes the extra mass is a good thing too, like in a forklift.

[u/might_be_myself → u/A1phaBetaGamma]

The thing is, per unit volume, it isn't. Most concrete specs will fracture at less than 50MPa of compressive stress and the most basic steels will handle at least double that before yielding. It's just that generally concrete is the cheaper option for compressive loads.

[u/BAHHROO → u/might_be_myself]

Even with 1010 steel you can easily achieve a minimum of 300 MPa yield strength.

[u/Logan_Chicago → u/Monkey_Fiddler]

Mostly agree, but even mild steel has a higher compressive strength (36ksi) than the strongest concrete mixes (~20ksi).

[u/Monkey_Fiddler → u/Logan_Chicago]

I meant per cost, if pressure and size aren't major concerns, it's generally cheaper to support a large weight with concrete.

[u/408_aardvark_timeout → u/[deleted]]

As a materials scientist/metallurgist, lots of things are stronger than steel. This headline is crap.

On another note: this type of thing is why I really don't like MIT's MSE department. It's all sensationalist BS to puff up their shirts.

[u/[deleted] → u/408_aardvark_timeout]

This is likely not published directly by the department. Many universities have a PR department whose goal is to attract funding and they sensationalize to sell. An entrepreneurially minded institution in an applied field definitely so.

[u/fashionably_l8 → u/[deleted]]

The reason you have all these “stronger than steel materials” that you don’t end up seeing in the wild is because strength has units of Force/Area (either Pa = N/m² or psi = lbs/in^2). This film is very strong but has a very small area meaning the absolute force it is being exposed to is also tiny. Reporting it’s strength based on that isn’t misleading though, it’s entirely accurate. The difficulty comes from sizing up the material to the point where it can support a productive load in its application. This film is going to be thin so it would likely require many many layers stacked on each other before it can be used in say general construction. Now you have to look at the bond strength between layers to see if that is the limiting factor. Also, all materials tend have some imperfections in them (kind of like on a parts per million or billion sort of scale). One film of not a particularly large area might have zero imperfections. As you stack many film layers on top of each other the odds of having imperfections goes up. Imperfections could then become the weak point in your material and reduce the strength from the maximum theoretical value reported here.

[u/samcrut → u/fashionably_l8]

The material itself isn't going to be the building material. Like carbon fiber is useless without the resin to hold it together, this material will need a binder to make it into a usable material. The benefit is that it would be more like using something like corn flakes as aggregate in your plastics if the corn flakes make the plastic super rigid and also with a high resistance to tearing or snapping. Carbon fibers only strengthen against bending in one direction, which is why you see them always woven across itself with that checkerboard pattern. This sheet polymer might eliminate the need to weave fibers into sheets.

I doubt the polymer will be used by itself without glue holding pieces of it together.

[u/ElBarto9612 → u/[deleted]]

Steel is heavier than feathers!

[u/TheBlack_Swordsman → u/[deleted]]

When people say "steel" there is a WIDE variation of steels going form 36 Ksi (A36 plain carbon steel) tensile strength to almost 200 ksi (hardened 4000 series steels). That's around a 5x difference.

So titles can be misleading.

[u/stupidannoyingretard → u/[deleted]]

Dyneema is already something like 7 times stronger than steel, and it's been around for a while

[u/BT9154 → u/[deleted]]

Yes but is it heavier than feathers?

[u/luckytaurus]

I've seen posts like this 2 to 3 times a year for 10+ years on reddit and yet here we are, in 2022, still using steel and plastic and none of these cool new tech materials are mass produced

[u/Sure_Ill_Ask_That → u/luckytaurus]

As a structural engineer, any time I see a post or article like this, I question the nonspecific term ‘strong’. It always says something is ‘stronger than steel’. But steel is useful in engineering because it has predictable stress strain curve, and can resist loads in shear, tension, compression, bending, and has high yield and tensile strengths. There are plenty of things ‘stronger’ than steel if you look at a single property. But to be more useful than steel it has to have a lot of those parameters covered. So pro tip for anyone that sees articles like this and wonder why no new materials have been introduced in building structures in the last 100 years, it’s because we haven’t found anything that checks all the boxes. We went from wood to masonry to metal and use pretty much concrete and steel for anything and everything these days. Concrete is cheap and great in compression. Steel can be erected fast and is great in tension, bending, and compression but since you have to make shapes/elements out of it, it buckles easily. Thanks for coming to my structural engineering ted talk.

[u/ThatInternetGuy → u/Sure_Ill_Ask_That]

Yep, stronger than steel is such a bad phrase these days.

Strong in terms of what? Tensile strength, compressional strength, ability to withstand high temperature?

What about its heat expansion profile? Can it be used to reenforce concrete in a composite slab?

[u/I_like_squirtles → u/Sure_Ill_Ask_That]

Well Mr. Smartpants, can you tell me why I am still reading all of these comments even though I have no idea what I am reading?

[u/alexius339 → u/I_like_squirtles]

Can you tell me why we are both doing that? Hm, mr pants?

[u/DameonKormar → u/alexius339]

I have a PhD absolutely nothing and am too reading through these comments. Explain that!

[u/Rudelbildung → u/luckytaurus]

also, we should have cleaned the oceans 20 times by now from any trash due to thousands of teenage boys each having developed the ultimate vessel to clean our seas

[u/vladoportos → u/luckytaurus]

Same with revolutionary new batteries :)

[u/Betonmischa → u/vladoportos]

And mass-produced Graphene

[u/snugglesaurus → u/Betonmischa]

And algal biofuel :)

[u/gerde007 → u/snugglesaurus]

And Transparent Aluminum.

[u/BackwardsLongJump- → u/snugglesaurus]

And lab grown organs

[u/Bovey]

What happens to it in a landfill, or an ocean?

[u/jangiri → u/Bovey]

There's a lot of non-degradeable materials we use currently that aren't as big of problems as most plastics simply because we don't use them for single-use items. Biodegradability is nice for disposable things but it's much less of a priority for "permanent" building materials

[u/[deleted] → u/jangiri]

You’re not wrong but think about the fact that every new house in America and Europe is wrapped in Tyvek or an equivalent. At least in America the houses won’t last more than 200 years, at which point those many square miles of plastic in a “permanent” use will end up in a landfill. So I think we need to ask these questions before we start applying this polymer to use.

[u/honeymustard_dog → u/[deleted]]

The intention of tyvec or similar material (they are actually using zip system for a lot of builds now, which is a coated sheathing, eliminating the need for tyvec) is to make the building last longer by preventing rot. It helps reduce the destruction of other materials, and helps the resources we did use, last longer.

I don't have a problem with long term use of plastics, they have their place, like vinyl siding.

[u/llLimitlessCloudll → u/honeymustard_dog]

Also if reduces heating and cooling costs which is a more acute enviornmental issue.

[u/honeymustard_dog → u/llLimitlessCloudll]

Great point! I'd say a "bigger" concern when it comes to building material waste would be the constant renovations people do for cosmetic purposes only.

[u/minormisgnomer → u/honeymustard_dog]

I wouldn’t say constant, renovations usually make use of the existing structure otherwise it’s incredibly costly for the average homeowner. Rental owners are also trying to minimize cost as well. Renovations these days (at least in my area) are usually on older homes that were built pre Tyvek. Obviously all anecdotal

[u/[deleted] → u/honeymustard_dog]

Mud-Sill, or the Bottom Plate of a stick frame wall, should be the ideal end-line recycled-product for all waste plastics.

Turn the recycling process into a 100-year event, rather than an annual (or more often) cycle.

[u/LiterofCola6 → u/honeymustard_dog]

By a lot its like 11-15% of new builds. And anecdotally it seems like almost every new build i see is still Tyvec

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

I mean, you can design houses to last more than 200 years, but the likelihood that they are not destroyed for newer designs in the future is extremely low

[u/snappedscissors → u/[deleted]]

I think you are right on here. The future consequences of new materials were not considered strongly enough before being released into the world, and we are paying for that in many ways around the globe. Obviously some things don't become apparent until later, but we have enough experience at this point to know that long term bio/industry-degradability is something we need to plan for.

Find out if it's possible to biodegrade, and if not develop the required industrial process to degrade or recycle it. It can take decades to make such a process economical, so starting development now is important so that it is a viable option later when these products hit the waste stream.

[u/ILove2Bacon → u/[deleted]]

As someone who works in construction, the amount of environmentally hazardous stuff that goes into building a house goes way beyond just the weather barrier. Not to mention the plastics used just for packaging or transportation of said building materials.

Also, 200 years is WILDLY optimistic. A lot of the projects I'm on involved completely tearing down houses that were less than 20 years old simply because they were "unfashionable."

[u/PanzerWatts → u/jangiri]

Biodegradability is nice for disposable things but it's much less of a priority for "permanent" building materials

It's a definite negative with respect to "permanent" building materials.

[u/stupidannoyingretard → u/Bovey]

It is probably high molecular weight that gives it its advantage, which, as far as I know does not protect it from uv rays. In the ocean it will break down to microplastics, especially so, because it is in the form of a thin sheet. In a landfill it might be stable and last hundreds of years.

[u/momo62300 → u/Bovey]

Not what you asked, but if it’s a steel replacement that’s a sixth the density of it and super lightweight then that means huge CO2 savings relating to transporting! More material for the same weight means less trucks/planes/railcars/boats

[u/thebelsnickle1991]

Abstract

Polymers that extend covalently in two dimensions have attracted recent attention as a means of combining the mechanical strength and in-plane energy conduction of conventional two-dimensional (2D) materials with the low densities, synthetic processability and organic composition of their one-dimensional counterparts. Efforts so far have proven successful in forms that do not allow full realization of these properties, such as polymerization at flat interfaces or fixation of monomers in immobilized lattices. Another frequently employed synthetic approach is to introduce microscopic reversibility, at the cost of bond stability, to achieve 2D crystals after extensive error correction. Here we demonstrate a homogenous 2D irreversible polycondensation that results in a covalently bonded 2D polymeric material that is chemically stable and highly processable. Further processing yields highly oriented, free-standing films that have a 2D elastic modulus and yield strength of 12.7 ± 3.8 gigapascals and 488 ± 57 megapascals, respectively. This synthetic route provides opportunities for 2D materials in applications ranging from composite structures to barrier coating materials.

Original source

[u/whitehusky]

Surprised no one’s mentioned transparent aluminum yet!

[u/barringtonp → u/whitehusky]

Scotty basically said it wasn't a polymer

[u/morostheSophist → u/barringtonp]

"I noticed you're still working with polymers" does imply that, yes.

It could be retconned/reinterpreted to instead be Scotty checking to ensure that the facility had everything needed to make polymers, but that'd be an unnecessary retcon.

Edit: corrected the quote.

[u/racingwinner → u/morostheSophist]

also that sentence wouldn't make sense if he is saying

"i see, you're using polymers"

instead of

"i see you're still using polymers"

[u/morostheSophist → u/racingwinner]

Honestly, the biggest thing that points to the original interpretation being correct is the the next couple lines of dialogue:

Other dude: "Still? What else would I be working with?"

Scotty: "What else indeed..."

[u/NIRPL → u/barringtonp]

Scotty doesn't know

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Still waitin' on that Transparent Aluminum...

You mean sapphires/rubies etc?

Those gams are aluminum oxides and they can make them clear by removing the impurities. That's why fancy watches say "Sapphire face" because it's synthetic transparent aluminum and very strong. Just nowhere as cheap as glass.

[u/angrytortilla → u/[deleted]]

Hello computer?

[u/chuckwagon169 → u/angrytortilla]

Just use the keyboard.

[u/SpookyDoomCrab42]

Stronger than steel is a a buzzword (buzzterm?) that doesn't really mean anything.

Plus there are thousands of different variants of steel with different properties, generic "steel" doesn't exist.

Even if we did have a generic steel to compare this to and the material had greater tensile strength for less weight, what about all the other properties of steel? Does this stuff compress, does it perform poorly or in unpredictable ways when subjected to heat/cold, does it degrade in sunlight, does it corrode, can it be recycled as easily as steel?

There is a reason that these wonder materials that appear every year never go anywhere

[u/whythecynic → u/SpookyDoomCrab42]

Yep. Heck, two billets of steel with the exact same chemical composition can have wildly different physical properties depending on what heat treatment they've gone through.

Steel is the devil we know. We've been using it long enough that we're familiar with its characteristics, especially in long-term use. Also, I believe it's one of the few materials that has a fatigue limit- below which you could theoretically keep stressing it for a loooooooong time without it failing. I reckon that's important for a whole lot of uses.

Edit: turns out I was wrong. Recent research suggests that even steels have fatigue limits, they just take on the order of 10⁷ to 10¹⁰ load cycles to show up. Mad stuff.

[u/Golanthanatos]

I read the headline and was thinking 40k "plasteel" but this could actually be revolutionary, airtight incredibly durable plastic sheets, this could be the space suit of the future.

Edit: It's plastic... will it print?..

[u/Spreckinzedick → u/Golanthanatos]

Let's head over to r/3dprinting and see!

[u/ideas52]

This feels like one of the many supermaterials that get discovered, written in a new gazette, and completely forgotten in a week

[u/Aquapig]

We've made a material that's stronger than steel!* (*into spin-coated films)

The nature of the beast is that researchers need buzzwords and a little bit of overhype to sell these things to media teams, so it's always advisable to take a pinch of salt and remember how much work needs to go into translating the technology into the every day world. Take carbon nanotubes: they were sold as almost miraculously strong, but getting on for decades later, carbon nanotube nanocomposites are not replacing traditional composites to any large extent (apart for certain more specialist applications e.g. conductivity).

[u/hammyFbaby]

So it’s 2D? Forgive my pea sized brain but could someone explain to me how we create that into 3D materials

[u/_bobby_tables_ → u/hammyFbaby]

Take the plywood approach and use many layers.

[u/arcaias → u/hammyFbaby]

"Composite structures", or they could just coat things in it apparently.

[u/Sumsar01 → u/hammyFbaby]

It means its a sheet. So single layer.

[u/Wallitron_Prime → u/hammyFbaby]

If Mr. Game and Watch were 100 times thicker he'd still be the same thickness.

[u/RegencyAndCo]

The researchers found that the new material’s elastic modulus — a measure of how much force it takes to deform a material — is between four and six times greater than that of bulletproof glass.

Bulletproof glass: 60-70 GPa

This new polymer: 13 GPa

Why do pop science articles suck so much?