backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 34 comment(s) - last by TETRONG.. on May 21 at 6:47 PM


Titanium aluminide, a mix of titanum and aluminum alloys is both strong and light making it ideal for structural applications. While standard titanium aluminide corrodes easily at high temperatures, a variant made in microgravity with traces of other metals is corrosion resistant.  (Source: BBC)

The European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF) in Grenoble, France is being put to work analyze the exotic metals formed in microgravity.  (Source: BBC)
Exotic new metals developed in microgravity can act as better catalysts and can also be superior in strength

Research in space has yielded many great inventions and discoveries such as modern battery technology, the tv satellite dish, ear thermometers, the space pen, and many more.  Still its potential is oft forgotten as researchers search for cheaper, seemingly easier Earth-researched solutions.

However, some researchers in the field of metallurgy are turning back to space as a source of potential groundbreaking advances.  Championing this effort is the program IMPRESS (Intermetallic and Material Processing in Relation with Earth and Space Solidification) run by the European Space Agency (ESA).  The programming is investigating the effects of microgravity on the formation of metals at an atomic scale.

Among the materials they are investigating is the potent catalyst raney nickel.  The porous nickel compound is a potent catalyst used in fuel cells as a replacement to more expensive platinum.  One gram of the compound can have an effective surface of tens of square meters.  The IMPRESS program leaders hope that by investigating the formation of variants of this and other materials at low gravity they can dramatically improve a number of fields.

While catalysts like raney nickel are one researched area, researchers also are interested metals for structural industrial applications that are strong and light.  While this sounds like two radically different fields of research, ESA project leader, Dr David Jarvis says it’s really not.  He states, "They sound like two completely different areas, but they both employ what are known as 'intermetallics' which are similar to alloys but are different in that they are actually chemical compounds, in the same way that water is a compound."

Among the materials investigated is intermetallic titanium aluminide, which is both very strong and very light.  Dr. Iles, an ESA researcher explains the critical problem, stating, "[Titanium aluminide] is easy enough to make but we have a stumbling block which is oxidation at high temperatures.  What happens is that the oxygen starts to creep in at the surface and what this does is form small cracks which can lead to larger cracks in a process we call embrittlement."

If the problem could be solved, it would invaluable to the creation of airplane turbine blades and other metallic devices.  Dr. Iles and his team have found a potential solution in adding tantalum and niobium to the mix.  The mix only works in microgravity (environments with low gravity such as space).  The researchers found that while the tantalum and niobium leave the mixture when the metal is formed in Earth gravity, when the pull of "up" and "down" is removed, they even distribute themselves.  The initial results look very promising.

To make the materials in microgravity one of three methods is employed.  One possible method is to use an atmospheric sounding rocket.  Another is to use a "drop tower" and yet another method is to use a parabolic aircraft flight, a common astronaut training exercise. 

Once a tiny sample of the material has been produced it must then be extensively tested.  The project is using the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF) in Grenoble, France to scan the new materials.  By using the machine's high-energy light (X-rays), it can determine the precise molecular composition and consistency, giving unprecedented insight into why the material works and doesn’t a work, and how Earth-gravity-made material differ from microgravity materials.

Researcher Dr. Reinhart explains the production and testing process, stating, "The aim is to obtain the perfect material that we can compare with the samples we produce on the ground. We investigate them by performing characterization with neutrons and X-rays, in order to get a full description of the materials."

Much of the work is expected to be moved to the Europe's Columbus science laboratory, recently added to the International Space Station (ISS), as its capabilities come online.  The space-bound environment will simplify the material production process.

The IMPRESS program is funded by the European Commission's Framework Programme.  It features researchers from 40 groups within the EU and Russia.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Will NASA ever be first again?
By LyCannon on 5/16/2008 11:21:36 AM , Rating: 3
While I am too young to have remembered when NASA was truly pushing the edge of space advance, I was inspired by the great stories that came from the 70's.

I truly hope that NASA get's their **** together and becomes the forerunner of technology and space exploration. IMHO, I think that the public has really lost faith in what NASA can do, and hearing about all the stuff the ESA and other countries are accomplishing removes more faith in NASA.

Although, they have had some excellent successes with the Mars missions, they have also had some pretty bad setbacks. Perhaps NASA needs another great challenge to rise to the occasion.




RE: Will NASA ever be first again?
By AlphaVirus on 5/16/2008 11:42:41 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
While I am too young to have remembered when NASA was truly pushing the edge of space advance, I was inspired by the great stories that came from the 70's.

I am also young, and the NASA stories of present and past are always very interesting. Maybe our great great grandkids will be able to discuss how outdated we were for only going to the Moon and Mars, lol.
quote:
IMHO,

Never use that again.
quote:
I think that the public has really lost faith in what NASA can do,

I don't think they have lost faith, but they have lost sight. You don't know about things you do not see often. Ask anyone what the last space launch they saw, they might say 'uhhhmm, iono' but ask anyone when did Paris Hilton go to jail and they will quickly respond and most likely will be correct. ABC, NBC, CNET, CBS, etc do not broadcast NASA events because it does not represent what our society has become, washed-up media zombies.
quote:
Perhaps NASA needs another great challenge to rise to the occasion.

Have no worries, NASA is always working on something, sending out new satellites and updating our future of space exploration.

Also remember, what happens with NASA depends on what the people want. Our taxes go towards government spending, and government wallets help support NASA projects. If you stay active on emailing congress and contacting NASA, you might convince the government to spend more on NASA. It takes a lot of work but its not impossible to help.


RE: Will NASA ever be first again?
By JonnyDough on 5/16/2008 3:57:20 PM , Rating: 2
Spend more of what? We're trillions in debt...we don't HAVE any more to spend. But don't worry, we'll find a way...or at least we'll leave it to our kids to find a way.


By AlphaVirus on 5/19/2008 3:47:23 PM , Rating: 2
Think about what you just said.
We are TRILLIONS in debt...ok thats true. Yet we manage to always offer relief to other nations and we always seem to give money away? Are the gears turning yet, how are we trillions in debt yet still manage to pay for stuff? How do we manage to keep the space exploration programs running if we are so far in debt? How can we keep a steady flow of cash to support the Middle East War if we have no money?

There are several systems, funds, foundations, and universal tracking systems setup to balance that debt, as we are not the only country in debt.


RE: Will NASA ever be first again?
By FITCamaro on 5/16/2008 12:05:02 PM , Rating: 4
As long as the Democrats are in power, NASA will fade. Space exploration gives the people nothing for "free" so they don't support it. And the people don't care because they're more concerned with who gets kicked off American Idol.

I truly hope NASA will start to get more funding in the years ahead. But I think its going to take China far surpassing us in space and becoming an apparent threat(already is) to most people to do it.

We should already have a next gen space shuttle and a moon base. But we don't thanks to the Clinton years.


RE: Will NASA ever be first again?
By TETRONG on 5/16/2008 12:24:50 PM , Rating: 2
Fit, you usually think before you talk.

Please continue doing so.


RE: Will NASA ever be first again?
By Noya on 5/16/08, Rating: -1
RE: Will NASA ever be first again?
By Ringold on 5/16/2008 6:09:30 PM , Rating: 3
You could attack Camaro, character assasination, while cowardly, is easy enough.

Or you could've tried to look at facts and stated positions, as Masher and I did.

But the low road is easy, requires no thinking and it makes you feel better. Whatever floats your boat. :P

Thanks for reinforcing my perception of Dem's, though!


By Reclaimer77 on 5/16/2008 6:39:39 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
What comes to mind when you see the word Camaro?:


Uhhh a sports car ??

Maybe I'm just crazy...


RE: Will NASA ever be first again?
By JasonMick (blog) on 5/16/2008 1:30:51 PM , Rating: 1
No need for a political debate, but if anyone has run the space program into the ground in recent years it has been the Bush administration. Not only has it drastically cut research and failed to keep NASA funding up to pace with inflation, it also has launched the ridiculous new "moon/mars program"

Don't get me wrong, I think we should be going back to the moon (and mars) and VERY soon. But to think that NASA can accomplish these ambitious objectives, an entire redesign of the Lunar lander, on a shoestring budget that is a fraction of that of the APOLLO program is at best an extreme long-shot and at worst a laughable attempt.

The worst part is research projects are getting slashed to fund the moon mission, but the moon mission meanwhile is going nowhere/advancing slowly due to lack of funding.

I won't comment on Clinton's effect on the space program, but it certainly was no worse than Bush's has been...


RE: Will NASA ever be first again?
By masher2 (blog) on 5/16/2008 3:09:27 PM , Rating: 3
Flatly incorrect, Jason. The Clinton Administration cut NASA funding dramatically , soon after taking office. NASA's funding didn't get back to its 1993 level until 2002, the year after Bush took office.

The Bush Administration, on the other hand, has raised the budget from 13.4B (2000) to 17.3B (2008)...a very large increase. These are simple, indisputable facts.

As for the Mars mission, had Congress actually approved the funding for it, it would have meant a return to NASA's salad days, and once again having a vision and a mission worth accomplishing.


RE: Will NASA ever be first again?
By Ringold on 5/16/2008 4:43:52 PM , Rating: 2
I assume those funding numbers are nominal, but partly regarding that and partly in response to Jason's assertion about not keeping up with 'inflation', that might true -- but only in a very limited sense.

By the numbers Masher just provided, thats up 29%.

Inflation, as measured by the CPI, consumer price inflation index, is up around 24%. (Source:FRED)

The key, however, is that you were thinking of consumer inflation; thats the wrong one. One of the hot items is food; I doubt food represents any significant portion of NASAs costs.

A better measure would be other indexes -- like, I would imagine, capital equipment costs. Up just 9% over the period. Finished goods less the food and energy industry, 8.8%. Some PPI indexes have gone nuts, but hard to say how much of that NASA is faced with, they're not buying tractors or oil rigs.

Further, if you look at CPI data, what is a perennial source of deflation? Technology costs. The TV's have dropped 18.3% in the last year, computers 12%, phones 5.3%, cameras 6.1%, and cars 1.1%. That, despite the aforementioned skyward PPI indexes. Due to all of the above, NASA should be able to keep quite a few more balls rolling now than in 2000.

If NASA can't leverage the incredibly lower costs since the Apollo days then it's not an indictment of Bush but of the failure of government in general. There is no reason at all why NASA can't reach its goals on the budget Bush suggested (which as Masher pointed out is not the one Congress has provided).

Last point, in response to both Jason and the guy that suggested FIT wasn't using his brain, Barack Obama has repeatedly stated he wants to terminate the Moon program for 5 years. I think everyone understands a 5 year break is a politicians way of killing a program permanently. He's quoted talking about what he wants to do to NASA all over the place, I don't understand how this much can be debated. We don't know how much McCain would do for NASA, I don't know if he's on the record on it, but we do know that Obama would certainly not be a friend of NASA.


RE: Will NASA ever be first again?
By TETRONG on 5/21/2008 6:47:45 PM , Rating: 1
Ha, you guys are too much.

Bush, Gore and Kerry are all cousins descended from Charlemagne!!!

You really believe all the lies your sold.

All this partisan bickering. Is there anything that's not a political issue with you people?

The entire notion of dems and repulicans is so infantile and ludicrious that anyone in their right mind above a certain maturity level simply has to laugh/cry at these popularity contests that keep you all so distracted. This is all a puppet show. Do you think your votes actually affect anything? Have you read any of the articles concerning voting machine fraud?

Do you honestly believe that NASA is anything but a song and dance for dreamy-time fifth graders? The reason why their budget was cut so long ago is that they're no longer a viable organization. The people at the top of NASA are told to either be the gov's propaganda mouth-piece, or to take a hike.

Lockheed has been flying planes into space for decades!!!
You all somehow manage to keep reading Anandtech, yet still remain ignorant of the TRUE current state of technology.

20 years ago the U.S. was the undisputed world power.

All that's left is just a hollowed out-rotten core.Do you think this was by accident or by design?
Take note of the rapidity with which it occured.

Now this nation is a shadow of it's former self, because citizens like yourself took their eyes off of the ball and allowed these divisions over the tiniest of issues to be magnified to the breaking point.

Next twenty years you'll be screaming about nationalism, while the rest of the world just shakes their head and wonders if you have a different color blood in your bodies because of your geographical location that entitles you to behave like killers.

Might makes right-Right?


By Reclaimer77 on 5/16/2008 4:48:53 PM , Rating: 2
Thanks masher. I'm so tired of people here spreading FUD about Bush and getting away with it. But I would expect a DT blogger to at least attempt getting some facts before spewing more anti-Bush bullcrap.

I think it would surprise a great many people to discover the scope of just how far Clinton set us back in a great many areas.


RE: Will NASA ever be first again?
By Grabo on 5/16/2008 8:07:00 PM , Rating: 2
http://www.redorbit.com/news/space/1298156/nasa_go...

"The White House has underfunded its own initial spending commitments by more than $4 billion, according to an assessment of the president's 2009 NASA budget proposal now before the House Science and Technology Committee.

"It's clear there is a bipartisan agreement that what NASA is asked to do is not properly matched with NASA funding," said Rep. Bart Gordon, D-Tenn., who chairs the House oversight panel. "We have to deal with that reality."

In a controversial response to the shortfall, NASA has slowed the growth of spending on other science missions, including those focused on the Earth and climate change"
--

""With few exceptions over the last two decades, NASA has continuously been asked to do more with less," said one of the hosts of the gathering, Scott Hubbard, a former director of NASA's Ames Research Center and a member of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board."


By masher2 (blog) on 5/16/2008 8:51:54 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
In a controversial response to the shortfall, NASA has slowed the growth of spending on other science missions, including those focused on the Earth and climate change...
How shocking that NASA should spend money on a trip to the moon or Mars, rather than on studying climate change, eh?


By Reclaimer77 on 5/17/2008 2:20:19 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
"It's clear there is a bipartisan agreement that what NASA is asked to do is not properly matched with NASA funding," said Rep. Bart Gordon, D-Tenn., who chairs the House oversight panel. "We have to deal with that reality."


Do you think any taxpayer has a problem with this ?

quote:
""With few exceptions over the last two decades, NASA has continuously been asked to do more with less," said one of the hosts of the gathering, Scott Hubbard,


I call this a good start. As a taxpayer I would be THRILLED if every government branch had to do " more with less " and actually be fiscally responsible.

quote:
In a controversial response to the shortfall, NASA has slowed the growth of spending on other science missions, including those focused on the Earth and climate change"


Two years ago data from a new NASA satellite proved there was no global warming or climate change crisis due to Co2 or greenhouse gases. Mission accomplished. NASA should be focused on going into space, you know, the actual reason they were founded ? There are 200+ other organizations that are doing just fine perpetuating the myth of " climate change ", let one of them do it.

I'm getting sick and tired of hearing about NASA bitch about its budget. Throwing taxpayer money at problems never fixed anything. The only thing you proved is that NASA's budget was full of bloat, like all government programs, and is being " forced " to actually focus on their intended MISSION STATEMENT. Well, boo hoo ?