Talking about graphene is becoming increasingly difficult. We have explored its properties in depth and studied its enormous potential, but these days the material is walking a complicated path, and there are still many years of development ahead before we see the first products based on it. Several projects are trying to improve the mass production of graphene, and until that fully "explodes", its presence will remain limited to the laboratory. This brings us to the latest development from MIT, where a group of researchers experimented with three-dimensional forms of graphene that would theoretically be ten times stronger than steel, with just five percent of its density.
Waiting for Graphene
Transistors, complete circuits, capacitors, transparent devices... a lot, and at the same time, nothing. Graphene promised the sky, the earth, a couple of moons, and we are still waiting. The reasons are varied, but experts agree that graphene probably has a better future in new applications, not as a direct replacement for existing solutions. Needless to say, patience will be critical: some say half a decade, while others point beyond 2025 to see the first consumer products. Obviously, this general disappointment (if we want to call it that) does not block graphene's presence in the laboratory. And with that in mind, MIT continues its experiments.
The 3D Approach
This time, a team of researchers designed three-dimensional forms of graphene with a configuration similar to a sponge. The data indicates a strength ten times greater than steel, with just five percent of its density. But not everything is graphene's responsibility; rather, the shape itself does much of the heavy lifting. Using graphene would be an ideal case, however, MIT does not rule out the possibility of adopting other materials and applying similar geometric characteristics.
In the video we see a test based on the plastic used by a 3D printer. The gyroid model with thin walls showed a more gradual failure, while the model with extra plastic accumulated energy until it exploded. MIT insists that geometry is the "dominant factor" and that graphene would be merely an optimal choice. A bit disappointing from a certain point of view, but with much closer real-world applications (bridges, filtration systems, etc.).
