Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Saturday December 01 2018, @10:21AM   Printer-friendly
from the garbage-in-garbage-out dept.

Study unlocks full potential of 'supermaterial' graphene

New research reveals why the "supermaterial" graphene has not transformed electronics as promised, and shows how to double its performance and finally harness its extraordinary potential.

Graphene is the strongest material ever tested. It's also flexible, transparent and conducts heat and electricity 10 times better than copper.

After graphene research won the Nobel Prize for Physics in 2010 it was hailed as a transformative material for flexible electronics, more powerful computer chips and solar panels, water filters and bio-sensors. But performance has been mixed and industry adoption slow.

Now a study published in Nature Communications identifies silicon contamination as the root cause of disappointing results and details how to produce higher performing, pure graphene.

The RMIT University team led by Dr Dorna Esrafilzadeh and Dr Rouhollah Ali Jalili inspected commercially-available graphene samples, atom by atom, with a state-of-art scanning transition electron microscope.

"We found high levels of silicon contamination in commercially available graphene, with massive impacts on the material's performance," Esrafilzadeh said.

[...] The article "Silicon as a ubiquitous contaminant in graphene derivatives with significant impact on device performance" is published in Nature Communications: DOI: 10.1038/s41467-018-07396-3


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 03 2018, @04:03AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 03 2018, @04:03AM (#769061)

    So silicon implants decrease performance compared to pure organic structures? Were there women on the research team? Because that could explain how a more diverse viewpoint figured out something earlier researchers missed.