Deltaker, S.A. tile. Credit: ASCER

The Spanish Ceramic Tile Manufacturers’ Association (ASCER) says it is working with the Harvard Graduate School of Design on a one-year research effort to explore the best ways to meet the increasing challenges of product customization, adjustment to buyers’ preferences, and sustainability in production.

The Ceramic Futures project will be led by Martin Bechthold, professor of Architectural Technology, and Christoph Reinhart, associate professor of Architectural Technology. According to an ASCER press release, the project consists of three phases.

The first phase (December 2009 to spring 2010) is focusing on current design-to-manufacturing processes. Work during this time is based on in-depth case studies on sustainability, manufacturing and related design and business strategies.

The second phase (January to June 2010) includes a detailed evaluation of the performance of ceramic materials in buildings. Integral parts of this phase are prototyping and experimentation studies that investigate the customization of ceramics through robotics and other digital fabrication technologies.In

In the final phase (May to December 2010), the group says it will develop the best ideas generated in the previous phase, and complete one or more prototypes to highlighting possible improvements in the fabrication of ceramic products.

Although details have not been announced, ASCER says it will disseminate the findings of the research project via lectures and publications.

Power-generating rubber films developed by Princeton University engineers could harness natural body movements such as breathing and walking to power pacemakers, mobile phones and other electronic devices.

Researchers at Princeton University have demonstrated that high performance piezoelectric ceramics can be transferred onto rubber or plastic, rendering them flexible without sacrificing energy efficiency.

“The human body is a ideal source of power if we can harness our body motion such as walking, finger typing or breathing. This would be especially convenient for implantable medical devices such as pacemakers, since surgeries are now required to replace dead batteries. If we could replace those batteries with power directly harvested from the continual motion of the lungs, it could significantly improve the quality of life for patients,” said Michael McAlpine, assistant professor of mechanical and aerospace engineering at Princeton University, in an interview with Nanowerk.

McAlpine and his team have fabricated biocompatible power-generating rubber films. By successfully combining silicone with nanoribbons of high performance inorganic piezoelectric ceramics, the team created an implantable ‘piezo-rubber’ that could harness natural body movements to power electronic devices.

Yi Qi, a postdoctoral researcher at Princeton University, holds a piece of silicone rubber imprinted with super-thin material that generates electricity when flexed. The technology could provide a source of power for mobile and medical devices. (Credit: Frank Wojciechowski)

The team has also successfully shown that it can transfer highly crystalline piezoelectric ceramic ribbons in high yields and over large areas onto rubber substrates.

Growth conditions for ceramic crystals are critical for achieving high piezoelectric performance – high temperatures and a carefully chosen growth substrate are required – both incompatible with flexible rubbers or plastics. The way McAlpine’s team solved the problem was to first fabricate PZT nanoribbons and then, in a separate process under ambient conditions, print the nanoribbons onto silicone rubber.

“First, PZT films were grown on a cleaved magnesium oxide crystal substrate and postannealed to form a perovskite crystal structure. Second, the structure, composition, and piezoelectric response of the films were characterized to ensure optimal performance. Next, the films were patterned into nanothick ribbons and printed onto clear sheets of silicone rubber (PDMS) via dry transfer. Finally, the fundamental piezoelectric properties were characterized on the rubber substrate using a nanoscale characterization method, piezoresponse force microscopy,” McAlpine said.

The findings were published in the January 26 online issue of Nano Letters.

I received some additional information about Carlo Pantano’s presentation on “The Art of Science of Glass” that will be held at 12 noon, March 26, 2010 at Penn State University.

Don’t expect a formal and technical lecture. Instead, Pantano’s presentation/conversation is part of Penn State’s ongoing “Unplugged” luncheon series that is modeled on the Café Scientifique concept that looks for opportunities to have an informal exchange between scientists and the public.

Here is what Pantano - who directs PSU’s Materials Research Institute – tells me he hopes to cover in his presentation:

“Historically, artists and scientists have been very successful collaborators. The glass artists in Italy gave Galileo his first glass lens. Archaeological stained glasses provide models for nuclear waste disposal. The Glass Flowers, which are precise, realistic models of plants, served as models for botanists at the turn of the century. Obsidian, a natural volcanic glass, first served stone age man for utilitarian purposes but progressed to be an artform. Today, both natural and synthetic glasses are widely used to create glass art. (Or, is it art glass?) Moreover, the materials and technology used to create the world-renowned glass art of Tagliapietra and Chihuly are as important to artists today as the samples of arts and craft glass were to the early scientists who made the first spectacles, thermometers, telescopes, batteries and vacuum chambers.

“Yet, we do not really educate across the art-science interface.

“In this conversation, I will describe these and other crossovers between the art and science of glass: glass manufacturing defects that inspire art; stained glass and photovoltaic solar art glass; glass art using a femtosecond laser; the increasing use of glass in architecture and medicine; and the broader impact of glass in our society. I will also describe our DaVinci glassblowing program at Penn State and our recent international excursion to bring artists, chemists and conservation scientists together at the graduate and professional level.

“My primary motivation for the DaVinci program at Penn State is to put real materials into the hands of undergraduate students in any discipline. A material they can make, study, control and be creative with. Glass art, especially glassblowing, familiarizes art students with scientific principles, materials and technology; for science and engineering students, it provides a sense of aesthetics and the importance of creating new ideas through association rather than simply deductive thinking. Artists and scientists may have different practical goals and approaches, but understanding and describing the nature of things is always at the root. Other motivations for the program are to heighten the interest of children and the public in science, and more generally, to introduce students to the real world of interdisciplinarity and the difficulties of communication therein.

The talk will take place in the Executive Room at the Penn Stater Conference Center Hotel. It is open to the public and includes a buffet luncheon. The event will begin at 12 noon, with the talk to begin at ~12:15 p.m. to allow time for people to go through the buffet line. The cost is $8 per person for members of the Penn State Alumni Association and $12 per person for nonmembers. Reservations are required and can be made by contacting Marilyn Engle at mbengle@psu.edu or 814-863-8117. Payment will be accepted at the event by check made payable to Penn State. The deadline to make a reservation is Friday, March 12.

GreenTech reported that some aerogel companies are offering thin blankets that serve as replacements for traditional fiberglass, foam or cellulose insulation. It’s still more expensive upfront but the costs have fallen to the point that it can make sense in certain cases, particularly masonry or curved walls. The video posted above shows aerogel insulation over bent tubing.

Aerogels are made by removing the liquid from gels, resulting in a material that is more than 90 percent air. The porous structure of the nanomaterial makes it difficult for heat to pass through. As a result, aerogels make very good and light-weight insulators.

Aspen Aerogels says that its aerogel blankets have two to four times the insulating value per inch compared to fiberglass or foam. It’s also relatively easy to work with, allows water vapor to pass through and is fire resistant.

Material company Cabot has also developed its Nanogel insulator for buildings. Another company, ThermaBlok, has had its insulation used in demonstration houses built during last year’s Solar Decathlon home competition.

Contractors have started using the material on superinsulated homes that are sealed from the outside, both over masonry and under shingles. On wood frame homes, thin strips of aerogel can be applied to studs to prevent what’s called thermal bridging, where heat escapes through the walls’ framing.

… adding, Jeebus, some of the commentors below are kinda clueless about how the fancy Internets work. If you want to know how to buy this stuff or get more techno information, contact one of the manufacturers of Aerogel we listed or look ‘um up yourself. It takes all of about .2 seconds poking around the Aspen Aergoel site to find the link for the page that reads CONTACT US FOR PURCHASING/TECHNICAL INFO. Likewise, Cabot offers an entire page of their Aerogel sales offices.

And for an extra .1 second of time invested, voila, Aspen provides this chart for for the R-value-philes (Spaceloft being Aspen’s brand name for their building insulation Aerogel):

The DOE announced that 24 million hours of supercomputing time out of a total of 1.6 billion available at Argonne and Oak Ridge National Labs have been awarded to investigate materials for developing lithium-air batteries that would be capable of powering a car for 500 miles on a single charge.

Through the Innovative and Novel Computational Impact on Theory and Experiment program, a research team including scientists from ANL, ORNL and IBM will use two of the world’s most powerful supercomputers to design new materials required for a lithium–air battery. Lithium-ion batteries, used in today’s emerging plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, currently have a maxiumum range of 40 to 100 miles before a recharge is necessary.

The calculations will be performed at both labs, which have two of the world’s top-ten fastest computers.

“Computation and supercomputing are critical to solving some of our greatest scientific challenges,” said DOE Secretary Chu. “This year’s INCITE awards reflect the enormous growth in demand for complex modeling and simulation capabilities, which are essential to improving our economic prosperity and global competitiveness.”

The INCITE program provides a collection of unique computational resources that enable scientists and engineers to conduct cutting-edge research in weeks or months rather than the years needed previously. The use of scientific modeling can accelerate scientific breakthroughs in areas such as climate change, alternative energy, life sciences, and materials science.

“Argonne is committed to developing lithium air technologies,” says Eric Isaacs, the lab’s director. “The obstacles to Li-air batteries becoming a viable technology are formidable, but the modeling and simulation capabilities of DOE’s supercomputers will help us accelerate the innovations required in materials science, chemistry and engineering.”

Hey NASA! I, too, will fill out a questionnaire about your new fancy-dancy Stardust-NExT site if you send me a little chunk of aerogel to play with.

If you liked the post below, I urge you to check out the KINETICA 2009 video. It’s full of demonstrations of kinetic art that depend on electronics, sensors, glass, steel and a variety of technical materials. (Sorry, but there is no direct link to the video: after clicking on the opening graphic, look for “Videos” under the “Media” menu option.)

For you glass aficianados, in particular, I recommend checking out Tom Wilkinson’s “Light Wave” made of what he says is about one-third of a ton of undulating glass rods mounted on a cam shaft that makes it ripple like water.

Ocean of Light from squidsoup on Vimeo.

Squidsoup is back! Titled “Oceans of Light,” this time, the groups latest artwork is made by using reconfigured video-wall technology to create a walk-through 3D grid of LEDs. The idea is to create an immersed experience of light-based visualisations in three physical dimensions. They have designed to piece to be large enough to be considered an environment rather than an object – a room filled with countless points of light, each one contributing to a dynamic space that surrounds and envelops participant.

The first piece to be shown on the grid is to be be premiered at KINETICA Art Fair, Feb. 5-7 2010 in London. combines abstract volumetric visuals with spatialised sound, to suggest an ecosystem of audiovisual entities that inhabit physical space. Visible and audible as they encircle and fly around the room, they dance with each other and together create what is both a fully three dimensional audiovisual environment and a musical composition.

Obama spoke about a renewed push for nuclear-based energy solutions in his SOTU speech, and Friday DOE Secretary Chu announced the appointment of the “Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future.” The misnamed commission is supposed to provide “advice and make recommendations on issues including alternatives for the storage, processing, and disposal of civilian and defense spent nuclear fuel and nuclear waste.” I say misnamed because finding a solution to used fuel and waste is a big problem – but not the only big problem with the nation’s “Nuclear Future.”

To be sure, I am glad that the administration is acting quickly on its promise. But based on the commission’s makeup, I think the Obama/DOE strategy to a large extent is misdirected. The commission is being cochaired by former Congressman Lee Hamilton and former National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft. Other commissioners include some good people from science and academia, but it also has a lot of others who are there for window dressing.

I do get that such commissions have to be bipartisan and cover a range of science-policy/government-industry representatives. Also, I get that there are security aspects to both the inputs and wastes from reactors. But having both chairs be individuals closely tied with national security seems to me to send an odd and misguided message.

For a new generation of nuclear power facilities to be built, the biggest hurdle will be (and has been) a wide range of public fears. A recent Gallup poll showed that while support is growing, it is very tentative: 59% of Americans support nuclear power, but only 27% support it strongly. Support is also very divided by political affiliation and gender. And, despite all of the discusses over the past few years about finding new energy solutions, support for nuclear power has barely inched up from 2005 (54%). And, 63% say they oppose building a new nuclear facility in their area. In other words, the support for a nuclear resurgence could be easily shaken.

To move forward, besides a waste strategy, the administration is going to have to answer two other glaring questions for the public: Do we have the improved technology this time around? and Do we have an effective regulatory system in place given that some of the private operators proved to be unreliable or untrustworthy?

From a science and technology point of view, there are some promising developments, such as fast reactors, that need to be examined. If it turns out they are worthwhile, they need to be explained to the public by people that know what they are talking about, not government mouthpieces or PR staff. Unfortunately, it doesn’t appear that new commission is going to be going in that direction.

Besides Hamilton and Scowcroft, the commission has 13 other members (and you can probably tell who knows anything in particular about domestic nuclear energy generation and who doesn’t):

• Mark Ayers, President, Building and Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO
• Vicky Bailey, ex-FERC commissioner and ex-DOE Assistant Secretary for Policy and International Affairs
• Albert Carnesale, Chancellor Emeritus and professor, UCLA
• Pete V. Domenici, Bipartisan Policy Center; former U.S. Senator
• Susan Eisenhower, head of Eisenhower Group
• Chuck Hagel, former U.S. Senator
• Jonathan Lash, head of World Resources Institute
• Allison Macfarlane, associate professor of environmental science and policy, George Mason University
• Dick Meserve, ex-NRC commissioner
• Ernie Moniz, professor of physics at MIT
• Per Peterson, chair of department of nuclear engineering, University of California, Berkeley
• John Rowe,  head of Exelon Corporation
• Phil Sharp, head of Resources for the Future

The commission will produce an interim report within 18 months and a final report within 24 months.

Kristen has posted a video, too!