I do wonder how much of a difference this would actually make. Surely the bulk of the weight is in the battery and the glass screen, so the percentage weight change by just making the back out of carbon fibre would be next to nothing.
Can someone explain to me exactly how carbon fiber breaks. I understand the concept that if you put stress on an object made out of the material in the same direction as the seams then it will break. What I don't get is how my tripods (I am a t producer) made out of carbon fiber have never broken
The carbon fibers in your tripod are not aligned, so different layers go in different directions to reinforce the material. That part of Apple's patent is not the unique part. Anything made of carbon fiber is made that way. The claimed unique aspect of Apple's patent is the use of an internal frame to support the skin and to prevent bending and twisting of the device, and I'm not even sure that is unique anymore.
I'm not sure how feasible this design would turn out to be. The frame would protect from bending, but in order to save any signficant amount of weight and avoid making the device thicker (we all know how Apple likes thin devices), the skin itself would have to be very thin. It would be like a drum head that you could push in and out. In order to protect the internal components, the skin would have to be relatively thick or include additional internal spars to support the skin. In the end, the additional cost of manufacturing the carbon fiber shell would probably outweigh (no pun intended) and marginal weight savings.
No, we have already debunked that piece of nonsense in previous threads, both in terms of extremely high cost and it being a heavy material.
As for this ridiculous patent application. If the patent office are silly enough to grant it, it would get rolled in a court challenge due to prior art. Boat building springs immediately to mind where cloth is wrapped over a PU foam form to make a skin and stiffening member a contiguous structure. Pretty sure it has been done in sailplanes for decades. as well.
Carbon is not exactly in short supply. There are CF recovery systems if we start to run short.
Ok, sorry to have missed the debunking. I was under the impression as it was so much stronger it could be far thinner thus overcoming the weight issue.
I like carbon fiber. I don't see the batteries as being a surmountable problem. They are already based on lithium, the lightest metal.
Speaking of which, I wonder why Apple don't look at applying the unibody idea to magnesium instead of Aluminium. There is a glut at the moment and it's cheap. It's Lighter than Al and stiff. I know it is reactive as all hell, but maybe they could coat it with Titanium nitride or some other surface treatment to get round the problem.
You mean make them out of magnesium like the cases of the old NeXT machines?
From what I remember that was one of the reasons they had problems manufacturing them, but maybe that's been solved now.
Carbon fiber has been used in kayaks for quite a long time now.
Airplanes, too. Anywhere lightness and strength are at a premium is a potential application for carbon fiber. Speaking of airplanes, they are most often constructed with a rigid skin over supporting spars and ribs. This method of construction, known as semi-monocoque, has been around for nearly 100 years.
Boats, road cars, all formula 1 racing cars (which have tremendous impact strength) many different aircraft, both military and non military, and even other computer devices- Sony come to mind. the only thing they can be patenting is some specific manufacturing or design technique, not the use of the material. I would love them to use cfrp for this and the Macbook Air. It's light, won't dent like aluminium and won't dent or scratch other things. And when the device finally dies, it will make a lovely high tech tea tray.
if they manage to not make it look like shit as in the sony's I am all for it but as is aluminum hands down.
I think that SJ's problem with 7" ipads will turn out to be a red herring.
7 Inch devices are the key to most of Apple's competitors. The reason is simple, Apple's iPad doesn't encroach on it's smaller iOS devices. Most of Apple's competitors can't compete with the smaller iOS devices. That means that if everyone else sticks to 7 inch devices, they can clean up sales from both ends of Apple products.
Unfortunately, I love my Mac too much to give it an android based companion. /bummer
Looks to me as though the Al is relatively a very small factor in the weight of the iPad...
That said, I own a magnesium electric bike an it's the lightest electric bike around - sure would like to see a Mg laptop first hand, not sure if it would work with apple's designs though!
I think his concern is about waste and the value of recycling that waste, not about carbon being plentiful.
Some types of carbon fiber and fabrics are in short supply, it would just depend on what fiber is chosen. The basic concept in the patent is not novel, but application to computer frames probably is. Unless Apple can come up with an automated lay-up and molding procedure the cost of these type backs would be really high. There is probably 4 or 5 dollars worth of materials in these backs, but the molding and lay-up costs could be pretty high.
Looks to me as though the Al is relatively a very small factor in the weight of the iPad...
That said, I own a magnesium electric bike an it's the lightest electric bike around - sure would like to see a Mg laptop first hand, not sure if it would work with apple's designs though!
A battery fire in a Mg framed laptop may be very interesting indeed.
When I suggested the use of Carbon Fiber, a few months back when rumors of the Air redesign, people jumped down my neck because of Carbon's poor wireless "transmission" capabilities.
So,
Bluetooth, Wireless N, GPS, and other possible radio's,
Seems to me that Apple has no choice but to file these types of patents, more to protect themselves from all the gold diggers who would use them to attack them were they in possession of them...
No, we have already debunked that piece of nonsense in previous threads, both in terms of extremely high cost and it being a heavy material.
As for this ridiculous patent application. If the patent office are silly enough to grant it, it would get rolled in a court challenge due to prior art. Boat building springs immediately to mind where cloth is wrapped over a PU foam form to make a skin and stiffening member a contiguous structure. Pretty sure it has been done in sailplanes for decades. as well.
Carbon is not exactly in short supply. There are CF recovery systems if we start to run short.
Don't be so sure. The patent process is more complex than you think. Anyone may take one or more patented concepts from anyone else, and roll them into another one, as long as doing so provides either a new use, or a noticeable improvement over the old patent.
Comments
Can someone explain to me exactly how carbon fiber breaks. I understand the concept that if you put stress on an object made out of the material in the same direction as the seams then it will break. What I don't get is how my tripods (I am a t producer) made out of carbon fiber have never broken
The carbon fibers in your tripod are not aligned, so different layers go in different directions to reinforce the material. That part of Apple's patent is not the unique part. Anything made of carbon fiber is made that way. The claimed unique aspect of Apple's patent is the use of an internal frame to support the skin and to prevent bending and twisting of the device, and I'm not even sure that is unique anymore.
I'm not sure how feasible this design would turn out to be. The frame would protect from bending, but in order to save any signficant amount of weight and avoid making the device thicker (we all know how Apple likes thin devices), the skin itself would have to be very thin. It would be like a drum head that you could push in and out. In order to protect the internal components, the skin would have to be relatively thick or include additional internal spars to support the skin. In the end, the additional cost of manufacturing the carbon fiber shell would probably outweigh (no pun intended) and marginal weight savings.
__________________
free photoshop tutorials
So this is where we are now. "I have an idea! Let's build bicycles out of unicorn tears one day! They're lightweight and have magical properties!"
"Quick, go get a patent!"
This patent business has gone too far.
Yeah, because there are so many cars, and other products already being built out of unicorn tears...
Are you trolling, or just daft?
No, we have already debunked that piece of nonsense in previous threads, both in terms of extremely high cost and it being a heavy material.
As for this ridiculous patent application. If the patent office are silly enough to grant it, it would get rolled in a court challenge due to prior art. Boat building springs immediately to mind where cloth is wrapped over a PU foam form to make a skin and stiffening member a contiguous structure. Pretty sure it has been done in sailplanes for decades. as well.
Carbon is not exactly in short supply. There are CF recovery systems if we start to run short.
Ok, sorry to have missed the debunking. I was under the impression as it was so much stronger it could be far thinner thus overcoming the weight issue.
I am a newbie here and just wanna say Hi to everyone. I am Daniel from Pennsylvania, US.
Hi Daniel. Welcome to AI. Try to avoid the trolls, we have plenty of them
I like carbon fiber. I don't see the batteries as being a surmountable problem. They are already based on lithium, the lightest metal.
Speaking of which, I wonder why Apple don't look at applying the unibody idea to magnesium instead of Aluminium. There is a glut at the moment and it's cheap. It's Lighter than Al and stiff. I know it is reactive as all hell, but maybe they could coat it with Titanium nitride or some other surface treatment to get round the problem.
You mean make them out of magnesium like the cases of the old NeXT machines?
From what I remember that was one of the reasons they had problems manufacturing them, but maybe that's been solved now.
Carbon fiber has been used in kayaks for quite a long time now.
Airplanes, too. Anywhere lightness and strength are at a premium is a potential application for carbon fiber. Speaking of airplanes, they are most often constructed with a rigid skin over supporting spars and ribs. This method of construction, known as semi-monocoque, has been around for nearly 100 years.
Boats, road cars, all formula 1 racing cars (which have tremendous impact strength) many different aircraft, both military and non military, and even other computer devices- Sony come to mind. the only thing they can be patenting is some specific manufacturing or design technique, not the use of the material. I would love them to use cfrp for this and the Macbook Air. It's light, won't dent like aluminium and won't dent or scratch other things. And when the device finally dies, it will make a lovely high tech tea tray.
if they manage to not make it look like shit as in the sony's I am all for it but as is aluminum hands down.
Carbon is not exactly in short supply. There are CF recovery systems if we start to run short.
I think his concern is about waste and the value of recycling that waste, not about carbon being plentiful.
I am a newbie here and just wanna say Hi to everyone. I am Daniel from Pennsylvania, US.
__________________
free photoshop tutorials
Welcome to AI Dan, enjoy your stay here.
I think that SJ's problem with 7" ipads will turn out to be a red herring.
7 Inch devices are the key to most of Apple's competitors. The reason is simple, Apple's iPad doesn't encroach on it's smaller iOS devices. Most of Apple's competitors can't compete with the smaller iOS devices. That means that if everyone else sticks to 7 inch devices, they can clean up sales from both ends of Apple products.
Unfortunately, I love my Mac too much to give it an android based companion. /bummer
Battery 148 grams
LCD 153 grams
Glass (and frame) 193 grams
Speaker: 17 grams
Main board: 21 grams
Everything else: 27 grams
Looks to me as though the Al is relatively a very small factor in the weight of the iPad...
That said, I own a magnesium electric bike an it's the lightest electric bike around - sure would like to see a Mg laptop first hand, not sure if it would work with apple's designs though!
I think his concern is about waste and the value of recycling that waste, not about carbon being plentiful.
Some types of carbon fiber and fabrics are in short supply, it would just depend on what fiber is chosen. The basic concept in the patent is not novel, but application to computer frames probably is. Unless Apple can come up with an automated lay-up and molding procedure the cost of these type backs would be really high. There is probably 4 or 5 dollars worth of materials in these backs, but the molding and lay-up costs could be pretty high.
Aluminum back 138 grams
Battery 148 grams
LCD 153 grams
Glass (and frame) 193 grams
Speaker: 17 grams
Main board: 21 grams
Everything else: 27 grams
Looks to me as though the Al is relatively a very small factor in the weight of the iPad...
That said, I own a magnesium electric bike an it's the lightest electric bike around - sure would like to see a Mg laptop first hand, not sure if it would work with apple's designs though!
A battery fire in a Mg framed laptop may be very interesting indeed.
So,
Bluetooth, Wireless N, GPS, and other possible radio's,
have no issue's with Carbon?
No, we have already debunked that piece of nonsense in previous threads, both in terms of extremely high cost and it being a heavy material.
As for this ridiculous patent application. If the patent office are silly enough to grant it, it would get rolled in a court challenge due to prior art. Boat building springs immediately to mind where cloth is wrapped over a PU foam form to make a skin and stiffening member a contiguous structure. Pretty sure it has been done in sailplanes for decades. as well.
Carbon is not exactly in short supply. There are CF recovery systems if we start to run short.
Don't be so sure. The patent process is more complex than you think. Anyone may take one or more patented concepts from anyone else, and roll them into another one, as long as doing so provides either a new use, or a noticeable improvement over the old patent.
I don't suppose there have been any instances in the past of SJ intentionally leading the hounds off the scent?
Now let me count 'em....