backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 94 comment(s) - last by nstott.. on Mar 19 at 3:03 AM


Taken with a flash, this photo contrasts reflectivity and absorbtion of various materials. On the left is a circle of black paint, in the middle is the new darkest material, and on the right is a disk of carbon. With the flash, it is easy to see how much blacker than black paint the material really is.  (Source: National Geographic)
Specialized nanotubes set the record for the blackest material on Earth

Chalk up another valuable use of carbon nanotubes -- creating the darkest material on Earth.  Last month researchers at Rice College and Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in New York used the handy carbon molecular structures to set an unusual world record -- the record for the most light-absorbing material known to man.

The key to the technology is atom-thick nanotubes.  The tubes are arranged vertically on the surface, widely-spaced and standing on end, like the bristles of a paint brush.  The key is the spacing.  By widely spacing the tubes, light is able to enter the material, but then ends up trapped within the collection of thin tubes. 

Project leader and Rensselaer physics professor Shawn-Yu Lin explains, "The loosely packed forest of carbon nanotubes, which is full of nanoscale gaps and holes to collect and trap light, is what gives this material its unique properties.  Such a nanotube array not only reflects light weakly, but also absorbs light strongly. These combined features make it an ideal candidate for one day realizing a super black object."

To give an idea of exactly how black the result is, black paint reflects approximately 5 percent of the visible light that strikes it.  The previous darkest material was a nickel-phosphorous compound, which only reflected 0.35 percent of visible light.  The new nanotube compound blows away these previous competitors, reflecting a bare 0.045 percent of the visible light that hits it. This is almost nine times less than the previous record holder and over a hundred times less than black paint.

Scientist Richard Massey, a dark matter expert at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena calls the material "very clever", but warns the public not to confuse it with dark matter.  He explains that dark matter absorbs no light and somehow behaves as if transparent, allowing all light to pass through it.  He contrasts this with the new material which "absorbs all light without reemitting/reflecting any—hence no light reaches us from it, and it appears dark."

The work was featured in the journal Nano Letters.  The team also applied for a Guinness World Record for the blackest material.

The first possible business application considered by Rice and RPI was solar power.  Despite the recognition, though, the solar industry remains relatively lukewarm to the new material.  While a few companies such as SolFocus contacted the team, others like Marc Cortez, executive vice president of sales and marketing at Soliant Energy were skeptical about the technology.  Mr. Cortez stated doubts about whether the technology could make an impact, stating, "The ultimate challenge will be to take it from the lab into a high-volume manufacturing environment.  It’s only then you’ll know whether or not it will be a 'game-changing' technology."

With the solar power industry not warming up enough to the new technology, a new group has jumped in to court Rice and RPI -- the U.S. Military.   The Military, according to Popular Science, approached the researchers with interest in using the technology.  The Military, which is investigating a number of nanotube applications, expressed hopes for employing the technology to make its B-2 stealth bombers even stealthier.  By using the material, the B-2s would be capable of absorbing even more radar, making them more difficult to spot.  The military is excited about how the new material could revolutionize its stealth efforts, making its arsenal deadlier and more efficient than ever.

Meanwhile, Professor Yu-Lin is quick to remind people of the technology's more peaceful applications such as improving the efficiency of solar panels, which are typically coated in more reflective black paint.  Another valuable application, he believes is using the material to line telescope barrels to provide a darker background to provide less interference with the focused celestial light.

One thing's for sure, whether it be for war or for peace, someone is certain to be interested in a commercial application of this exciting new nanotube material.



Comments     Threshold


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

Makes sense
By masher2 (blog) on 2/22/2008 10:48:41 AM , Rating: 5
From a solar power perspective, the difference between absorbing 95% and 99.99% of all light is only a 5% increase in efficiency. But for stealth applications, its a 500X increase in performance.




RE: Makes sense
By AlphaVirus on 2/22/2008 11:05:50 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
The Military, which is investigating a number of nanotube applications, expressed hopes for employing the technology to make its B-2 stealth bombers even stealthier. By using the material, the B-2s would be capable of absorbing even more radar, making them more difficult to spot. The military is excited about how the new material could revolutionize its stealth efforts, making its arsenal deadlier and more efficient than ever.

Now THAT sounds cool. It actually sounds like they are getting closer to making Wonder Womands jet. If you can get the nanotubes to reflect 0 light then it would be cool to see a jet fly with this technology.

I wonder how long it would take to redesign the current B-2 with this new nanotube tech.


RE: Makes sense
By Polynikes on 2/22/2008 11:21:06 AM , Rating: 2
This would make for amazing camouflage. The reason you put on camo paint is to reduce the reflectiveness of your skin. Just imagine, at night, an enemy could shine a flashlight on you and not even know you were there, as long as it was fairly close to pitch black behind you.

Now all we need is a way to hide heat dissipation from infrared. :)


RE: Makes sense
By phattyboombatty on 2/22/2008 11:54:53 AM , Rating: 5
This material is great for radar stealth, but it is horrible for visual stealth. The idea of visual camouflage is to blend in with the surrounding background. Anyone covered in this super-black material would stand out really bad. They would be so much darker than their surroundings that they would be easily spotted.

I remember reading that the engineers who originally designed the US's stealth aircraft wanted to paint the planes a dark grey color, because that would be the hardest to spot in the night sky. However, the pentagon trumped them and chose to paint the stealth aircraft black because it looked better.


RE: Makes sense
By threepac3 on 2/22/2008 12:33:48 PM , Rating: 2
Good thing stealth bombers are usually flown at night.


RE: Makes sense
By 91TTZ on 2/22/2008 5:56:11 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I remember reading that the engineers who originally designed the US's stealth aircraft wanted to paint the planes a dark grey color, because that would be the hardest to spot in the night sky. However, the pentagon trumped them and chose to paint the stealth aircraft black because it looked better.


No, it was because they had to make a choice between visual stealth and radar stealth. The only stealthy (to radar) paint they had was black. Gray would be more visually stealthy, but the black paint was more stealthy to radar.


RE: Makes sense
By Integral9 on 2/25/2008 9:08:01 AM , Rating: 3
You're on track but I think the real reason is the first stealth planes were / are horrible in maneuverability. So to compensate, they fly at night and you can't shoot what you can't see and since both the sky and earth are black at night, you paint the plane black. The newer stealths, F-22 & F-23, are much better at maneuverability and could stand a chance in a dog fight. So they can fly during the day and are painted gray.


RE: Makes sense
By SlyNine on 2/23/2008 4:57:07 AM , Rating: 3
Its like the Military's version of Pimp My Ride.


RE: Makes sense
By CollegeTechGuy on 2/24/2008 2:02:52 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, it could help infantry and other heat producing objects. Granted the black nanotubes on the outside would not be very good, but if they were somehow put on the inside of clothing then it could block more of the infrared produced. Basically not allowing infrared light from going past an infantries clothing or something.


RE: Makes sense
By masher2 (blog) on 2/24/2008 2:49:09 PM , Rating: 2
> "but if they were somehow put on the inside of clothing then it could block more of the infrared"

If you absorb infrared you absorb heat. Do that on the inside of clothing, and the heat then conducts to the outside, where its re-radiated as (you guessed it) infrared.

To block infrared emissions, you want the exact opposite -- a material that *reflects* as close to 100% as possible. Put that on the inside of clothing, and you'll prevent any infrared from escaping. Of course, such clothing would be extremely uncomfortable to wear anywhere but a very cold climate, but what's comfort compared to stealth, eh?


RE: Makes sense
By ShadowZERO on 2/25/2008 12:59:59 AM , Rating: 2
"To block infrared emissions, you want the exact opposite -- a material that *reflects* as close to 100% as possible. Put that on the inside of clothing, and you'll prevent any infrared from escaping."

Ok, I'm confused with this. You are saying to block infrared emmissions, you would have to block all heat from escaping your clothing? Wouldn't that be impossible, not just "uncomfortable", since your body relies on constantly producing heat to keep itself alive?

I think you would have to find an efficient way to make the surface of your clothing room temperature to make yourself invisible to infrared.


RE: Makes sense
By ShadowZERO on 2/25/2008 1:11:44 AM , Rating: 2
How about this: Design a lightweight and efficient cooling system to attach to your new blacker-than-night carbon nanotube suit. Rig a sensor to it, so that the surface of your suit stays whatever temperature your environment is. That way, you'll give off hardly any heat signal and also reflect almost no light.

Now thats my idea of stealth.


RE: Makes sense
By masher2 (blog) on 2/25/2008 10:36:48 AM , Rating: 3
> "Rig a sensor to it, so that the surface of your suit stays whatever temperature your environment is"

What you've described is thermodynamically equivalent to letting no heat escape from your body itself.

And yes, if you block *all* heat from escaping the body, you'll eventually die. Such a suit would be practical only for short periods...unless one assumes a technology high enough to build a "reservoir" inside it, capable of holding waste body for later disposal.


RE: Makes sense
By mattclary on 2/22/2008 11:59:54 AM , Rating: 5
Actually, camouflage breaks up patterns. In a forest, all the greens and browns blend in with the background and serve to break up the recognizable pattern of the human silhouette. Take that same guy in cammies and put him in an urban environment and the camouflage is way less effective. Now there are also urban camouflage patters than use blacks and greys that are much more effective in an urban setting.

As an aside: I was hunting with a buddy one time. While I was turned around to take a leak, he leaned against a tree to rest. When I turned around, it took me about 10-15 seconds to find him even though he was within 20 feet of me and in a very visible location.

Now, the main concern with seeing the B2 comes from radar. It's great if you can't see it in visible light, but missiles don't home on visible light. If the nanotubes can be tailored to absorb radar, and I think that is not an insignificant IF, then this will be awesome. Visible light is measurable in angstroms, thus nanotubes can readily absorb it. Radar is measurable from meters down to millimeters. Current radar absorptive tech relies on a honeycomb structure to serve the same purpose as these nanotubes, with longer wavelengths being compensated for by fuselage geometry.


RE: Makes sense
By clovell on 2/22/2008 2:07:03 PM , Rating: 5
>As an aside: I was hunting with a buddy one time. While I was turned around to take a leak, he leaned against a tree to rest. When I turned around, it took me about 10-15 seconds to find him even though he was within 20 feet of me and in a very visible location.

I know it's beside the point, but he wasn't wearing orange?


RE: Makes sense
By JSSheridan on 2/22/2008 4:48:04 PM , Rating: 3
You're assuming a lot. They could have been hunting turkey or it was a bow only deer season.


RE: Makes sense
By SlyNine on 2/23/2008 4:59:07 AM , Rating: 3
Becuase being shot with a bow is painless.


RE: Makes sense
By mattclary on 2/23/2008 11:27:42 AM