Iron Man-inspired material made from DNA and glass is 5x stronger than steel — and 4x lighter::Regular glass is brittle and fragile. But pure glass coated on DNA is a different beast entirely.

  • IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    8 months ago

    It could also be that the material is just not all that special. “Stronger than steel” is a very easy goal to achieve. Lighter is easy too. Now pair those two with higher fracture toughness, and you have something worth talking about.

    • CADmonkey@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      8 months ago

      “Stronger than steel”

      Recovering machinist here, and I agree. The other thing that annoys me about “StRoNgEr ThAn StEeL” is that there is a wide variety of different types of steel, all with different strength charachteristics. Some types of steel are 5x stronger than other types of steel.

      Same thing for Ford’s “Military grade” aluminum. The truck bodies are made out of 5052 and 6061 depending on how it’s shaped. Those are literally the most common grades of aluminum. And that’s what you’d make a truck body out of, but its funny.

    • paysrenttobirds@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      The real success here seems to be creating a super nano configurable lattice out of DNA that can then be coated with other things to make a composite reinforced material like super fine reinforced cement. The article I’ve read only mention the 5 times compressive strength for glass, but their next try will be carbon fiber, which has comparable fracture toughness to steel even without this lattice design.

      I guess I don’t understand all the negativity in this thread, like everything was new once and just because every breakthrough doesn’t make it to Walmart by Christmas doesn’t mean it’s not exciting.

      • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        I guess I don’t understand all the negativity in this thread

        It’s because people have been seeing the same headline for decades, and 99% of the time it leads to nothing useful. Also, the headline is over-selling it by comparing it to fictional miracle materials.

        • paysrenttobirds@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          8 months ago

          Ok, you’re probably bored with this conversation, so don’t take this personally, but I’m going to double down. Check this summary of composite history in aircraft.

          One of the first high-performance composite materials (for primary structures) was introduced in the 1980s on the 737 horizontal stabilizer and underwent extensive testing and in-flight evaluations. In the mid 1990s, composite vertical and horizontal stabilizers for the 777 were designed, developed, and implemented into production, reaping the benefits of lightweight structures and improved aircraft performance

          It took 30-40 years from first industrial use to ubiquity, that’s not counting the time between research success to first industrial use. If you see things move from lab to everyday use within your lifetime that’s more or less expected rate of progress.

          And the scientists involved were inspired by the movie, that’s not hype, is just how people are motivated to make these first steps when they know they may not even live to see the real world outcomes.

    • Throwaway@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      Yeah, theres a reason why trains, ships, and trucks are all made with steel. The ongoing toughness. Higher fracture or whatever the engineers call it.