Superwood aims to replace steel and concrete with a sustainable alternative

[Squid Surprise]

because the "strength-to-weight ratio nearly ten times greater than steel" already says it's lighter. It's like saying the superwood is strong and lighter than steel and lighter. Maybe I should have said redundant rather than making no sense?

Not really… let’s say it’s 100 times stronger than steel and twice as heavy as steel? That would have satisfied the strength-to-weight ratio… you need to add “lighter than steel” to make it clearer… not redundant at all!

 

[drjekelmrhyde]

Volvo station wagon with wood trim body panels

 

[mbk34]

Not really… let’s say it’s 100 times stronger than steel and twice as heavy as steel? That would have satisfied the strength-to-weight ratio… you need to add “lighter than steel” to make it clearer… not redundant at all!

So it's 50 times stronger for the same weight. Would you say it's lighter than steel at that point? I.e. 50 lbs of steel has the same strength as 1 lb of Superwood. Would the Superwood be lighter? Do you actually need to be told that the Superwood is lighter?

 

[Underdog]

Wooden aircraft!

 

[Squid Surprise]

So it's 50 times stronger for the same weight. Would you say it's lighter than steel at that point? I.e. 50 lbs of steel has the same strength as 1 lb of Superwood. Would the Superwood be lighter? Do you actually need to be told that the Superwood is lighter?

yes, you do… cause that can still be relevant for certain buildings… maybe the land (aka base) of my structure can only support a certain weight… if the “super wood” is too heavy, then steel would be superior even if a bit weaker…

Knowing more information is rarely a bad thing…

 

[mbk34]

yes, you do… cause that can still be relevant for certain buildings… maybe the land (aka base) of my structure can only support a certain weight… if the “super wood” is too heavy, then steel would be superior even if a bit weaker…

Knowing more information is rarely a bad thing…

I'm feel I'm flogging a dead horse here. If your structure can only support a certain weight then you'd get more strength from this new Superwood for that given weight. You don't have to use the whole tree. Should we just agree to disagree?

 

[Squid Surprise]

I'm feel I'm flogging a dead horse here. If your structure can only support a certain weight then you'd get more strength from this new Superwood for that given weight. You don't have to use the whole tree. Should we just agree to disagree?

You’d get more strength but use less mass - which isn’t always a good thing. Perhaps you also want it to protect you from the elements? Again, MORE information is NOT a bad thing.

 

[New Day]

Replacing steel with wood now ? The "carbon footprint" and corporations are the real problem, not the materials. I remember a time when bottles were made of non hormone modifying glass and shoes made of non stinky feet, long lasting leather. Now both of them are plastic. Not to mention cotton shirts, wool pullovers and silk blouses. Plastic everywhere. Even ceilings and roofs are now made of plastic. But here nobody carbon-footprints-complains. Meanwhile wood has become a luxury product but is supposedly going to be a solution to replace steel. Hope it can be welded.

Actually, a month ago I read a bit about sonic welding of any materials. If they think only a li-ttle further, they will have it all.

Shoes stink when people (men especially) don't wash their feet in the shower. NO letting the water run over feet does not clean. Also, wear socks. Lastly, use baking soda in the shoes.

 

[Tayvl]

Might be a good idea to invest in saw blade research while you're at it...

 

[spam joe]

It says it's environmentally responsible, but how is it recycled? If it doesn't rot or decompose or otherwise degrade, then what happens when it's time to trash it?

 

[mailpup]

It says it's environmentally responsible, but how is it recycled? If it doesn't rot or decompose or otherwise degrade, then what happens when it's time to trash it?

To be fair the article says it is resistant to rot which, to me, means it's not impossible to rot.

 

[spam joe]

To be fair the article says it is resistant to rot which, to me, means it's not impossible to rot.

To be fair the article says it is resistant to rot which, to me, means it's not impossible to rot.

To be fair the article says it is resistant to rot which, to me, means it's not impossible to rot.

Yeah maybe. My guess is it will likely leach out constituent chemicals (for tenants to breathe in or during recycle or landfill), which isn't a problem with steel.

 

[Tantor]

because the "strength-to-weight ratio nearly ten times greater than steel" already says it's lighter. It's like saying the superwood is strong and lighter than steel and lighter. Maybe I should of said redundant rather than making no sense?

Steel has a higher strength to weight ratio than foam. But it's lighter.

 

[Tantor]

I think the strength/weight (specific strength) claims are questionable. They may be comparing it to a soft steel.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specific_strength

To convert wood to Superwood, they REMOVE softer and hollow components, and compress the remainder. In the simplest model, the actual material does not become stronger, you just have more of it in a particular volume.

Cardboard is the reverse of Superwood. They take two pieces of paper, ADD space in the middle, which reduces the mass/volume, and makes it stiffer. But cardboard's specific strength remains the same as paper.

Compare it with piano wire (400) or carbon fiber (4000). To be ten times stronger than piano wire, Superwood would need to be 4000, or about the same as carbon fiber. I don't see Superwood claiming it's the same as carbon fiber.

However, the compression probably adds other effects that strengthen the material. It may line up the fibers so they don't buckle as easily. Removing soft material would allow adjacent fibers to buttress each other. It's possible that fibers bond in a new way. They may introduce 'alloying' materials.

Steels are very sensitive to micro structure, grain alignment, and alloying elements. Superwood is probably the same.

 

[jeffbert]

We have yet to see how it holds-up after time's passage. How well will it perform after 5 years, 10 years, etc.

 

[Ben Myers]

It should be forbidden to make wooden houses, which are both fragile against fire and virtually any natural cataclysm.

I would accept furniture made from it, though, better than pressed wood dust.

Yes, the US builders build a lot of wood houses, rather than longer lasting brick, stone or other. The frames are wood, too. But they are cheaper to build.

 

[yannus]

Actually, a month ago I read a bit about sonic welding of any materials. If they think only a li-ttle further, they will have it all.

Shoes stink when people (men especially) don't wash their feet in the shower. NO letting the water run over feet does not clean. Also, wear socks. Lastly, use baking soda in the shoes.

Well, let's consider there was no sarcasm in your answer.

1.There won't be any welding of that kind soon and we both know it.

2.Synthetic shoes always end up stinking, no matter how much you care. On the other hand, it's almost impossible to have stinky leather shoes. Not to mention kids and the careless way they handle their shoes.

 

[New Day]

Well, let's consider there was no sarcasm in your answer.

1.There won't be any welding of that kind soon and we both know it.

2.Synthetic shoes always end up stinking, no matter how much you care. On the other hand, it's almost impossible to have stinky leather shoes. Not to mention kids and the careless way they handle their shoes.

You considered correct.

Such technology will get used in China. And that brings us back to planned obsolescence - of humans. The nano will ensure this.

Organic fabrics breathe but will still stink. Leather sucks cos it don't wash well, requires maintenance, and holds onto grease and body funk. You just wanna get out of the dog house on this.