Slashdot Log In
Nokia Developing Diamond-Like Gadget Casing
Posted by
Zonk
on Tue Jan 23, 2007 09:27 AM
from the still-waiting-on-transparasteel dept.
from the still-waiting-on-transparasteel dept.
space_pingu writes "In the future, all gadgets could be coated with tough, diamond-like material. A patent from Nokia — featured in the latest patent round-up from New Scientist — describes a way of infusing plastic cases with a material, structurally similar to diamond, made from coal. Not only is it more scratch and grime-resistant, but it's also cheap and biodegradable. Apparently it also shines like a metal. The article also touches on a technique for welding with 'ice bullets', and an airport scanner that protects the dignity of travelers."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
if you drive a late model car... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Unless you have problems with your cell phones rusting out before you're ready to throw them away, I don't think you'll have much to worry about.
Re:if you drive a late model car... (Score:5, Informative)
When I was working at a company doing rotary press holograms, we were working on doing coatings of TiO2 using crystal growth. Our rough estimates were double the scratch resistance of an acrylic coating. Fun mixture - Titinate/Titinol acid inhibited/water catalized reaction occuring in an anhydrous methanol solution printed onto a film. All the benefits of glass vapor deposition (refractive index/scratchresistance) at about $0.05/1000SI as opposed to $1/1000SI.
While it might be good for the scratch resistance, I do have to wonder what this is going to add to the cost - it might just be cheaper to use a more durable plastic instead of cheap plastic w/ coating.
Parent
Re:if you drive a late model car... (Score:5, Funny)
"Blah Rover blah blah blah food."
With apologies to Gary Larson, and also to tinkerghost.
Parent
Re:parent WILL be modded up (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
*yawn* (Score:5, Funny)
Or leverage my dry wit, stiff upper lip, and giant mustache to join the Vickies.
Re:*yawn* (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Why ask Slashdot when you can ask Wikipedia? (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Doh (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Impractical (Score:3, Insightful)
Traveler dignity is not good for security theater.
How about Tenifer? (Score:2)
Re:How about Tenifer? (Score:4, Informative)
"Glock, an Austrian firearms manufacturer, utilizes this process to protect the slides of the pistols they manufacture. The Tenifer finish on a Glock is the third and final hardening process. It is 0.05 millimeters thick and produces a patented 64 Rockwell C (diamond cone) hardness rating via a 500 C nitride bath. The final matte, non-glare finish meets or exceeds stainless steel specifications, is 85% more corrosion resistant than a hard chrome finish, and is 99.9% salt-water corrosion resistant. After the Tenifer process, a black Parkerized finish is applied and the slide is protected even if the finish were to wear off. Several other pistols also use this process including the Walther P99 and Steyr M/S series."
This stuff is different, because it isn't a nitriding process, it's a diamond coating process. You get loads of coatings for engineering purposes, a few I've heard of at work are deep gas nitriding, armoloy, diamond-like-coating, tungsten carbide coatings, etc
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Welcome (Score:5, Funny)
X-Ray every passenger? (Score:4, Interesting)
Before anyone starts quoting dose limits at me, I'm going to say right now that exposure to ionizing radiation should be kept as low as is feasible to do. This means that you _avoid_ unnecessary radiographs and similar procedures, not throw them up for every air passenger--not at the doses imparted by modern radiographs. I also can't understand how they can support such a system when some folks fly dozens of times a year or many more and will have no practical way to track the number of radiographs they've had taken so far this year etc. etc. Can you imagine a very frequent flyer being turned away from security because he'd been put through the scanner too many times this year? Of course you can't--that would never happen because nobody is keeping track.
Unless backscatter x-ray requires far, far less entrance exposure than standard radiography (which I suppose it would since it doesn't need to penetrate the body) to the point where it's into background or only somewhat above, it's very hard to not be a little worried by this. Of course, if they plan on visualizing both sides of the body at once, then naturally they will have to penetrate the body. Then you have the issues of people being told to "go through again" because of machine glitches, because someone was looking at the bag scanner instead, etc.
What really worries me is that nobody seems to even be talking about this. That either means that the doses from these radiographs really are that much lower (and I just don't know it), or that nobody is really concerned by it (which is a scary thought, meaning as it does that our "security" obsession is starting to physically do harm to people).
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:X-Ray every passenger? (Score:5, Informative)
We can say that it seems that this scan (assuming it "behaves" dose-wise just like a PA chest radiograph) just adds a dose of about an extra hour of flight-time. Of course, since we're not provided any of the dose profile information ourself (if they use lower energy x-rays the dose goes up a bit) there's no way for us to really be sure. We can sit here and approximate and hand-wave all we'd like, but as a medical physics student I haven't heard a word about these machines or their potential health effects OR about any regulations for these machines. Now, I can't expect to hear everything about every new radiographic device, but I consider this a pretty important advancement in the field, and I never hear anyone discussing putting health physicists in airports to monitor these machines. Considering how closely watched and regulated are medical radiographic instruments, it seems that these machines should be subject to similar close monitoring--which is probably not feasible in an airport-security environment.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Something is misleading... (Score:2)
Airport Scanner (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Easy:
Sir, please insert the Dignity Protector Applicator into your rectum when this light turns green, then rest both palms on these shiny metal pads and relax all muscles. Next!
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, better try your hardest not to ever think of a penis! DON'T THINK OF PENISES!
YOU MIGHT CATCH THE GAY!
"an airport scanner that protects the dignity..." (Score:2)
iPods (Score:2)
Who'd apply Dikote to their cellphone? (Score:2)
No, wait, they want to use the phone as a blunt weapon, so they raise the power level by one. Nokia: For when you really need to do (STR-1)L stun damage. I'll wait for the Motorola CHNSW.
Bling-bling (Score:2)
ooh! no-scratch Shiny!
Re:hmm (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Strong != hard (Score:5, Interesting)
On the other hand, if you know a way to make cheap diamonds a metre long by 10cm square as one perfect crystal, at a price under $100, I'd like to be your European sales agent.
Parent
Re:Strong != hard (Score:4, Informative)
It is a very strong material for its weight and can absorb large amounts of energy, both in bending and impact. Looking for a bedplate material recently for a heavy vibrating system, I couldn't find anything better, in terms of performance and price, than European oak supported by steel beams.
Fir is stiffer and considerably cheaper. It is also generally available in much longer lengths than oak.
On the other hand, if you know a way to make cheap diamonds a metre long by 10cm square as one perfect crystal, at a price under $100, I'd like to be your European sales agent.
How thick does it have to be? If you only need a few microns, then no problem.
Parent
Re:Strong != hard (Score:4, Informative)
You know, they used to make ships out of oak. The old Royal Navy and all that.... "Hearts of Oak". Yes, they were clad with copper at the waterline but that was to keep the Toredo (sp?) worms from chewing up hull. Pretty water resistant. And natural - can't forget that. No nasty nano this and nano that.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
You mean something like wood? (Score:2)
I would say wood, which is the most widely used construction materal in temperate climates, is both strong and biodegradable.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
So what?
Ok, so some how it is biodegradable, but the rest of the product still is made of plastic/metal, and those, afaik, are still NOT biodegradable.
Oh, and I am with you on wondering how it is both ultra strong AND biodegradable. After all, are diamonds biodegradable? Some one else said bones, last I checked bones last a VERY long time, sure they are biodegradable, but it will take many years to do so....
oh well, I dont' get it.
guess I should do some more research.
Re: (Score:2)
That's what recycling programs are designed for.
Re: (Score:2)
Wait the multitude of years that it would take to wear off (I find it hard to believe that something that can stand up to regular use for a few years with out being damaged is likely to degrade in a few months after that, look at wool socks, they take years to degrade), and then recycle the base parts?
I think the entire biodegradable thing is a red herring. Anything tread with this stuff will probably need another treatment to get it off, and then after that you can recycle it the way you
Re:Hard - not tough. (Score:5, Insightful)
This is not a good thing.
Why? The vast majority of people want to replace their technology products after a relatively short period of time whether they are broken or not. If your technology device is over-deisgned and over-engineered to last longer than you want it, you are not getting the best value for your dollar.
Ultra-reliable and ultra-durable devices do exist, mostly for military or industrial customers. Most people, though, would never pay the prices that those products demand.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
re: not a good thing? (Score:3, Informative)
Instead of your purchase becoming garbage just because the casing is all cracked/dama
Re: (Score:2)
If you can make a gadget more durable without adding too much to the price
Sure, if durability is free then there's no reason to not include it. But those "free" improvements have for the most part already been made. Switching from, say, plastic to aluminum or ceramic is definitely not free. Making a hermetically sealed gadget is far from free. Even certain designs that increase durability come at an aesthetic price and often, consumers reject them outright because they want something lighter/smaller/c
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Mod parent -50 Rap Reference (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Don't you mean, "yeah baby!"? And wouldn't a diamond condom be a little scratchy? I mean, there's hard, and then there's too hard...