!
Posted on 08/12/2010 7:59:04 PM PDT by Swordmaker
Apple has entered into an exclusive agreement to utilize amorphous metal alloys with unique atomic structures, allowing products that are stronger, lighter, and resistant to wear and corrosion, AppleInsider has learned.
The metal alloys owned by Liquidmetal Technologies were developed by a research team at the California Institute of Technology, and their amorphous, non-crystalline structure makes them harder than alloys of titanium or aluminum.
Introduced for commercial applications in 2003 through the Delaware-based Liquidmetal corporation, the product has been used to create technology for the U.S. Department of Defense, has been found in medical equipment, and is even used to create sporting goods like tennis raquets and golf clubs.
In a Form 8-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission last week, Liquidmetal Technologies indicated that it had granted all of its intellectual property assets to Apple. According to the terms of the deal, Apple was awarded "a perpetual, worldwide, fully-paid, exclusive license to commercial such intellectual property in the field of electronic products in exchange for a license fee."
Though the licensing agreement grants Apple exclusive use in consumer electronics, Liquidmetal is still allowed to license its products to other companies for any use outside of markets where Apple competes, meaning its deals with defense contractors, sports equipment manufacturers and medical suppliers are likely to remain intact.
The agreement was made on Aug. 5, and was revealed to the SEC on Monday. It was signed by Larry Buffington, president and CEO of Liquidmetal Technologies.
The company's official website gives examples of where Liquidmetal's products were used in portable electronics in the past. It touts that Liquidmetal alloys are 2.5 times the strength of commonly used titanium alloy and 1.5 times the hardness of stainless steel found in portable electronic devices. The technology is said to allow for thinner, smaller design while offering greater protection for internal components, and giving users a scratch and corrosion resistant exterior.
"As the demand for product 'miniaturization' continues in the electronic casings industry, Liquidmetal alloys enable smaller, thinner and more durable designs," the company's website reads. "Current casings technology is pushed to the limit in supporting these new designs and specifications, especially requirements for larger LCD screens, thinner wall sections and pure metallic surface finishes for products such as mobile phones, PDA's and cameras."
Past devices where Liquidmetal's technology was utilized include the Nokia Vertu smartphone, Sandisk Sansa media player, and Sandisk U3 Smart thumb drives. The product was also used to create strong hinge components for devices like flip smartphones.
Apple's interest in a company like Liquidmetal is no surprise, given its constant desire to create smaller and thinner devices. Apple has also employed a unibody design in its portable computers, beginning in early 2008 with the MacBook Air.
The precision unibody enclosures are milled from a single extruded block of aluminum, allowing devices like the MacBook Pro to become thinner while maintaining a rigid, sturdy frame. Previously, the frames of Apple's notebooks were made from multiple parts. Now, raw aluminum is carved out using CNC, or "computer numerical control" machines.
These charts are facts, not speculation. They may not have enough examples to satisfy you but this chart is matching Titanium with Stainless Steel not plain carbon steel which has a much lower yeild strength. Standard bridge and beam steel has a yeild strength of 36ksi. Thus the name A36. "High" carbon steel for the same uses has a yeild strength of 50ksi but this comes at the cost of much more difficult joining requirements and the possibility of needing field heat treatment to ward off embrittlement.
Plain carbon steel is a wonder material but it is much less strong than you seem to believe. Don't wade any deeper in the waters of foolish pride defending steel, it doesn't need it. Most folks wouldn't understand the second chart that swordmaker posted. What is shows is the ability of a material to be cold worked essentially which is very valuable for making shaped metal objects like pots, pans and electronic device covers.
Look, I will try to be as nice here. You’re just posting marketing burble. You don’t actually know much about the materials science or manufacturing here, or the competing technologies in metallic injection molding today.
The upside Apple is going after here is reducing their manufacturing costs, just as the manufacturing of smaller machined parts is going to MIM instead of CNC machining. There are no materials problems or issues with the aluminum they’re using in their cases now, other than the speed of manufacturing. I’m sure Apple is looking at their sales volumes and doing some math on the CNC cycle times, and then the capital costs of adding more CNCs to increase production.
After all, it was only two yeara ago Apple was trumpeting how much waste they reduced by going to CNC machining of their new cases to gain some rigidity. They were so proud of their new case manufaturing technology - and it was entirely modern and a good job. The video they had of the CNC run was impressive for those of us who do machining.
I’m sure that they’ll trumpet the first products cases with this material to high heaven with the usual attending Jobs Reality Distortion Field, but it doesn’t do anything for me, an engineer who knows a couple of things about metals and machining, bending, casting and forging them.
If they wanted to impress a guy like me with how tough their cases are, they’d put out a case made of Inconel. But that ain’t gonna happen; there is absolutely no need for it. 7075 aluminum is entirely sufficient for the job at hand if we discount the CNC cycle times.
For me, the net result will be about as impressive as going from a gun receiver made of a machined forging or billet to a stamped and welded sheet metal receiver. Sure, they both work, but we know the real reason for going to a stamping: speed of production at a low cost.
Who the hell said ANYTHING about going to a "stamping?" They are planning on casting the cases, an easy process similar to the way plastic can be cast... haven't you read ANYTHING about what the advantages of this material are? They can low temperature cast them with little to no shrinkage or after casting machining required.
Or are you referring to the stamped receivers with roll pins that Winchester tried to foist off on the public back in the sixties to replace the machined Pre-64 Model 94s?
In fact, the cost of the material Apple will be using with this technique is HIGHER than the aluminum they are currently using, but the method will save money in the long run, cutting costs by limiting the machining. They are going to have a thinner, lighter, solid cast casing that is resistant to scratching and distortion.
There is a distinct advantage over using the Liquidmetal for the case over the current aluminum for the laptop casing or the stainless steel of the iPhone case.
By using a stronger, lighter material, they can make equally strong, same sized cases with more room inside for larger, higher capacity batteries, providing longer useful operation time before recharging, extending the current ten hours to perhaps 12-14 hours or more for laptops, and the 8 hour iPhone to 10 or 12. That was the one of the primary reasons Apple went with the uniblock construction of the laptops originally: the unitary design strength provided more room for battery placement and allowed Apple to offer industry leading .
Why not try READING the advantages of the material and why Apple has locked in the technology and argue the facts instead of raising an non-existent straw man techniques, or reasons for changing manufacturing methods, that have not even been mentioned, and invoking "The Jobs Reality Distortion Field" as though the cases on the current laptops are not very strong and leading the field.
Many stainless alloys scratch pretty easily when confronted with some grit.
Agreed, and of course the same is true of aluminum. What stainless and aluminum have in common, tho, is finish and corrosion resistance. If this amorphous metal is corrosion resistant, and if corrosion resistance is a desirable property in an iPod, iPad, etc, then it makes sense to compare the strength of those materials for that application.The chart Swordmaker posted at 16 indicates that the subject material is markedly stronger than stainless or aluminum. Which, depending on the practicalities of fabrication, might be traded in whole or in part for weight reduction.
I'm genuinely curious as to what these downsides are. The positives that you mentioned are precisely what makes these alloys attractive to a manufacturer like Apple, but I'm not aware of the drawbacks you mention.
I know that they have a relatively low melting point, but still high enough that it ought not to be a concern for use as a laptop case.
Carbon carbon (carbon cooked at 2000 degrees under 2000 lbs for 6 to 8 months)is very hard material would be stronger.
Last Fr and “inside source” reportedly passed on info about pending Sept. announcement of new Macbook Air by Apple. The reporting source claimed more memory, more hard drive cap. and reduction in screen size to 11.6 inches (from 13). Is it true? We’ll find out next month.
But if true, I suspect demand will be intense, especially if constructed of these materials in article you posted.
wow, your knowledge of steel is extremely limited. You must be a dinosaur referencing 36ksi beam and column steel. I’m surprised you didn’t mention 32ksi steel!
Here’s a clue for ya, now look up rebar, prestressing strands, spring steel, tool steel, and threaded fasteners.
Quit playing dumb. Your charts are bogus. They are bogus because they compare tensile strength to a low strength steel, and they compare elasticity to a rather unelastic steel.
nice try.
I'm no golfer but why would a golf club maker think a more elastic metal would be a positive thing?
Check out the Wikipedia article on Liquidmetal. Impressive stuff. Apparently what Apple bought wasn’t so much the concept of these alloys, which has been around for a while, but a way to mass-manufacture and cast them cheaply.
That's actually kind of the point. Cast metals suck for high-end uses because the way the crystals are arranged. You can then use expensive forging processes to better align the crystals, regaining that strength and resistance to fatigure. Liquid metal gives you that in a cast that's almost as easy to make as injection molding plastics.
I think that was a bit of hubris, not fully tested. This alloy is extremely springy, which theoretically made it awesome for a golf club face, as it would rebound a golf ball better. Turns out though that formulation could crack after repeated impacts with a golf ball.
The big upside is that it is cheap to make into complex shapes. The secondary upside will be scratch and dent resistance.
I think that's 99% of the attractiveness in this application. Apple obviously is fed up with weak plastics, which is why you see so much machined aluminum. But aluminum has a problem of being relatively heavy, and it has to be expensively machined for Apple's needs. A lighter metal that can be effectively injection molded like plastic sounds like Ives' wet dream.
Carbon steel = hard + brittle + rusts
Amorphous alloys = hard + tough + corrosion resistant
You mean like Windows, Or Office?
their amorphous, non-crystalline structure makes them harder than alloys of titanium or aluminumThanks Swordmaker.
Would make good swords, too, eh Swordmaker?
LOL!! I’d been sitting here thinking about that very thing — mentally designing my own “dream sword”! :-)
!
Apparently you cannot have a civil discussion without ad hominem attacks. I am not "playing dumb" nor are the charts "bogus," as you claim without proof. You want to claim that, post at the specs for a stronger stainless steel that would or could be used for the same porposes, not some other steel that is stronger but does not compete and is not suitable.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.