Van der Waals forces between woven carbon nanotubes

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the Van der Waals forces between woven carbon nanotubes, particularly in the context of their application in constructing a space elevator. Participants explore the theoretical estimation of the minimum length of carbon nanotubes required for their Van der Waals forces to match the tensile strength of a single nanotube.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant references a TED Talk discussing the potential of using shorter carbon nanotubes to create a strong space elevator cable due to the Van der Waals forces between them.
  • Another participant inquires about the theoretical estimation of the minimum length of two parallel single-walled carbon nanotubes needed for their Van der Waals forces to equal the tensile strength of one nanotube, asking for clarification on the radius as well.
  • A subsequent post reiterates the question about the radius, suggesting to represent it as a variable "R".
  • Another participant questions the parameters that influence Van der Waals forces, indicating a lack of expertise in the area.
  • One participant expresses frustration about the expectation for self-sufficiency in finding answers, suggesting that the complexity of the topic warrants discussion rather than simple searches.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

The discussion reflects a lack of consensus on the parameters affecting Van der Waals forces and the specific calculations needed to estimate the minimum length of carbon nanotubes. Multiple viewpoints and questions remain unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants have not provided specific definitions or parameters for the Van der Waals forces, nor have they resolved the mathematical steps necessary for the estimation discussed.

Happablapp
I was watching the following TED Talks video about using carbon nanotubes to build a space elevator:



After the 12-13 minute point the speaker starts describing how very short carbon nanotubes can be pulled from a "nanotube forest" and spun together to create a very long thread. However the rupture strength is low compared to individual nanotubes. Elsewhere I've read that it is Van der Waals forces that cause carbon nanotubes to adhere to each other in a nanotube forest, allowing them to be pulled and spin into longer threads. The speaker suggests that it might not be necessary to grow nanotubes tens of thousands of kilometers long to build a space elevator, but rather that much shorter carbon nanotubes will have sufficient Van der Waals forces acting between each other to equal the tensile strength of a single carbon nanotube, allowing a sufficiently strong space elevator cable to be spun from relatively short carbon nanotubes. Can anyone tell me how to theoretically estimate the minimum length of two parallel single walled carbon nanotubes such that the Van der Waals forces between them are equal to the tensile strength of one?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Happablapp said:
Can anyone tell me how to theoretically estimate the minimum length of two parallel single walled carbon nanotubes such that the Van der Waals forces between them are equal to the tensile strength of one?
What radius?
 
Bystander said:
What radius?

I assume most carbon nanotubes would have nanometer scale radii, but let's keep it non-specific. Let's represent radius as a variable "R".
 
And on what parameters do vdW forces depend?
 
Bystander said:
And on what parameters do vdW forces depend?
Beats me. Not my area of expertise.
 
Happablapp said:
Beats me. Not my area of expertise.
"Spoon feeding" is discouraged on PF. Take a stab at it.
 
Bystander said:
"Spoon feeding" is discouraged on PF. Take a stab at it.
Already did. If it was as simple as doing a Google search, I wouldn't be posting my question on PF.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
14K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
9K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
65K