Versarien Share Discussion Threads

[superg1] 07/1/2020 21:45

There are 100's of 'graphene' producers in China. One listed in the top ten are called Tunghsu

I seem to recall them in an RNS somewhere wanting VRS graphene and help.

[schmally] 07/1/2020 21:28

Loggy, I noted they had entered into one of those MOU’s with MartinRead. You know, just like the dozens of MOU’s that VRS entered into that you suggested were worthless.

I’m glad that you now acknowledge that MOU’s are actually significant👍

A bit concerning that they have given up so much control to MartinRea as a result of their investment. It’s not as if the investment gives them exposure to multiple sectors, as their focus is predominantly only on light weighting car parts. I’d be concerned if I was an investor. that they negotiated and agreed terms in a position of weakness in desperation rather than ensuring any deal was in the best interests of shareholders.

Thankfully Neill refuses to bend over like NanoXplore at the first sniff of an investment from a 3rd party. Not in the interests of shareholders and all that.

Very comforting.

[aquaesulis01] 07/1/2020 21:24

Log as Nanoxplore are part of the Graphene Reach Registration Consortium how are they able to legally manufacture more than the 10 tonnes limit?

[superg1] 07/1/2020 21:23

. Naughty me engaging, self slap on wrist and removed.

[alchemy] 07/1/2020 21:20

Ah come on ; Transcendence..think of humanity your great grandchildren.

[tini5] 07/1/2020 21:16

Well he did say he’s never met TW. Guess somebody else handles him and tells him what to write on TW’s behalf.

[superg1] 07/1/2020 21:09

He is such a loser. I think TW described his as a hand grenade in our exchanges, tried to distance himself from him, not wanting to be associated etc.

[loglorry1] 07/1/2020 21:00

Hi @schmally they do. To name but one...

We also have another partnership with MartinRea International, which is the most important strategic shareholder of NanoXplore. MartinRea is one of the largest automotive parts suppliers in Canada and North America; they have more than 40 plants around the world and about 15,000 employees, conducting more than $4bn in sales annually.

Worth reading the link this came from as you'll likely learn a few things.

The point is that while you all focus myopically on VRS there are many ohter companies that are getting on with the job and selling Graphene GNP already and driving down price to enable widespread adoption. It's a commodity product. NanoXplore currently produce 25ton/year meanwhile VRS has sold what 12Kg?

[superg1] 07/1/2020 20:52

Schmally For now now I'd be happy with a tonne or two orders to kick things off.

35,000 tonnes as per the demand suggested for a few years time leaves plenty to go around.

What about XG and all the others of the past, must be bored of them. I recall the days of folk crowing about AGM and Haydale. How times change.

In reality of you check the data AGM don't do graphene, they know they don't so are concentrating on dispersion tech. You can see how far Haydale have got with dispersion as their 'killer app'.

[pshevlin] 07/1/2020 20:31

where will we be in 100 years eh!
Dead!

[superg1] 07/1/2020 20:09

I mention that as I had an interesting chat with a city guy today re the guys that think graphene will be big and the others that think it will be a load of old tosh.

Well you old tosh guys are so far off the mark it just shows how clueless you are.

All will reveal itself and even the believers will be totally stunned.

I recall the days of the DIY folk raving about this new lithium battery jobs that were so much better than old batteries.

Going back further those iodises with those mobile phone bricks.

AT&T paid for market research to establish if they should pursue the mobile phone market they gave a set period. The market reach said 90,000 of demand so AT&T ditched the idea.

The actual demand was 120 fold of the forecast and the rest is history.

Graphene is coming along with other nano materials it will be in virtually everything. It is material like no other and it's going to hit the market very hard in the future with funds scrambling to invest.

As it stand the believers are invested in the Apple of its sector. There will be plenty to go around on demand as it will be huge.

[laginaneil] 07/1/2020 20:06

Good evening Super,

Yes, I tend to think of it as a 'stack' of A4 paper, stong when you pull end to end

but they all slide over each other, Van Devals force between the layers etc.

I notice they also talked about 'functionalised' materials, things with various

atoms on the last carbons. Throw everything into the patent to cover all possible

infringements.

Great science, where will we be in 100 years eh!

[loglorry1] 07/1/2020 19:59

Look no further than NanoXplore GrapheneBlack™ 0X



6-10 layer Graphene Nano Platelets.

They are building a 10,000 ton/year plant which they have funding for

Targetting a price of $8/kg currently arouned $80/kg.

I know it's apparently not the real deal!

[rogerbridge] 07/1/2020 19:44

I could be wrong, but that sounds like one of Patrick’s in his XG day’s. He was visiting hs ex XG contacts, so maybe something will come of it.maybe not.

[superg1] 07/1/2020 19:41

Continued on that point.

So some companies tried synthetic versions. A common problem is the lateral size of then in the 150 nm or 300 nm range. That's what it was for the 3 I found, that is where the sticky stamp problem comes in, not enough surface area to bond properly.

XG sciences do multi-layer in their M and H grades. Anyone can do that including VRS and 100's do just that.

XG tried to go the few layer (C grade) but their process is too harsh, it smashes the platelets to bits leaving very poor lateral sizes. One paper said they were so small they could no longer be called platelets, also their damage rate was high. So tiny they clump together.

Thomas Swan have the same issue smashed all to bits. It's the same problem worldwide with near all who have tried. VRS found a formula and process that works.


It's not as simple as just producing the graphene you have to separate it. A typical method is a centrifuge which works by weight. Multi-layer is heavier so can be separated if you have single layer or large lateral size then they will be filtered out on their weight and so on.

So if you want to keep larger lateral graphene then you also retain multi-layer smaller graphene platelets.

This effect can be seen in grades for sale as the layers go up so do the lateral sizes.

[superg1] 07/1/2020 19:30

Lag

The definition of nano is anything under 100 nm so that may cover the range.

There is a thread with posts showing why single and few layer is much higher performing than multi-layer for strength.

One science paper in particular picked up on why the dramatic drop off in performance.

To put it in simple terms, the bond between layers is weak. Think of it like a pile of beer mats and adding some downward and sideways pressure, they soon separate and fall apart due to the multiple weak links. Now imagine just 2 beer mats with the same force and it's more difficult to make them slide apart.

In the case of VRS GNPs you are talking many billions of platelets of single and few layer which heavily populate the polymer with stronger points than the polymer.

If multi-layer is dominant introduces many billions of weak points in the polymer as so as the layer level climbs the gain falls off a cliff to detrimental making the polymer weaker.

In the case of lateral sizes think of stamp on an envelope which sticks on with the glue. Now imagine the stamp 1mm x 1mm with the same glue. There will be a lot of envelopes that will reach their destination without a stamp as the dining won't hold in normal handling.

It's a Goldilocks game of the prefect mix, but then there are different perfect mixes for different application.


So when you hear about thermal and modulus (elasticity) then if that's all you want and strength isn't an issue, then multi-layer is fine.

So yes there is a market for multi-layer but it isn't graphene as it doesn't give the full range of gains that graphene does due to the weak binds between layers.

The trick is to get to few layer levels but retain decent aspect ratios, too small no good, too big no good etc.

[woodpeckers] 07/1/2020 19:25

Had to laugh...someone didn't like my post from earlier...

"Soooo good to see this thread back to its old self... :-)

...wonder who that might be? :-)

[bobsworth] 07/1/2020 19:21

Evening laginaneli
My thoughts exactly!

[1teepee] 07/1/2020 19:21

You and me both

[laginaneil] 07/1/2020 19:13

Evening Bobsworth,

That patent seems to have taken the from 2015 to 2018 to sort out.

The graphene platelet thickness from 1 to 100 nm (3 to 300 atomic layers).

Maybe they did some early work with 'rubbish graphene' from other vendors

but want to cover all 'angles' in the patent.

Good find very interesting, thanks.