From: Mike Lorrey (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Mon Feb 25 2002 - 10:11:47 MST
Doug Jones wrote:
> justin corwin wrote:
> > This small item details the apparent manufacture of small quantities
> > of "tranparent aluminum"
> > http://www.sci-fighter.com/news/newsfeb02/feb21aluminium.php3
> > it's listed as a weapon's technology, but i have to wonder, is this kind
> > of thing useful as a spacecraft material? and baking extremely finegrained
> > aluminum into transparency kind of implies this can be done to other
> > metals. titanium windows, anyone?
> I get really exasperated with sloppy terminology and incompetent
> reporting. It's transLUCENT aluminA, not transparent aluminum, dammit.
> It's simply sintered aluminum oxide with particles significantly less
> than 500 nm, so that it scatters visible wavelengths poorly. If you
> want it actually transparent, hell, just use crystalline alumina- better
> known as sapphire. 'Taint cheap, though. The sintered material is
> probably tougher than sapphire, but still very brittle. Glass makes
> lousy armor.
On the contrary, ceramic materials are the new thing in body armor as
well as in heavy military equipment. There was an interesting show on
Discovery a week or so ago about an armored vest which sandwiches a 1/4"
plate of sintered ceramic between a couple thin sheets of kevlar.
Effective against AP rifle rounds, even.
> Metals are inherently opaque precisely because they are electrically
> conductive- once you get more than a few skin depths of material, the EM
> field gets attenuated away to nothing. Transparent aluminum or any
> other metal is physically impossible. It ain't often that I can state
> something with such confidence.
The only way to have your cake and eat it with transparent metals is to
honeycomb it with transparent crystals.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 13:37:41 MST