• Welcome to the Fantasy Writing Forums. Register Now to join us!

The Palladium Skyscraper Skeleton

There is talk of a better alternative to steel, and one among the subject is "palladium glass". Manhattan Gold & Silver sums up the backstory of p-glass's construction, written in October 2014:

Just a few years ago, materials scientists from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and the California Institute of Technology created a type of microalloy using palladium, phosphorus, silicon, germanium, and silver. When combined with glass, it removes its characteristic brittleness. On top of that, it’s stronger and more lightweight than steel.

How is p-glass stronger and lighterweight than steel?

When force is applied to glass, shear bands form within it — which turn into cracks, which causes the glass to break. Since glass has a non-crystalline structure, shear bands and cracks can form very easily. Palladium’s crystalline structure creates microstructural obstacles that inhibit shear bands from creating cracks. When force is applied to palladium glass, many shear bands form, but they curl back on themselves. This gives the material plasticity, allowing it to bend before breaking. The result is a material of unparalleled strength (i.e. the amount of force a material can take before it deforms) and toughness (i.e. the energy required to fracture a material). It’s somewhat like a rubber band made of steel — it can readily bend and flex, but also stand rigid and hold its shape.

In OTL, unfortunately, the concept of palladium glass as the bone of a skyscraper's skeleton is currently reserved for the realm of science fiction, and here is why:

Unfortunately, the price of palladium and the difficult refining techniques required make palladium glass prohibitive to mass produce for the time being. Otherwise it could be a perfect material for fabricating vehicles and aircraft.

Now the Manhattan Gold & Silver article never mentions the idea of palladium glass being used for skyscraper-building, but considering the final paragraph, I don't think mentioning it would have made any difference.

But in an alternate Earth, with alternate quantities and qualities of resources, the Industrial Revolution began in China, around the 1330s CE, after the newly appointed emperor decreed an end to the old ways (Daoism, Buddhism, etc.) in favor of a future of progress. (Picture a medieval Mao Zedong.) It wouldn't be until the 15th century that China would decree expanding and updating trade by inventing rail transportation, starting with a railroad starting in Beijing, crossing through the wilds of Mongolia and Russia, then dividing Europe in half before bridging the Strait of Gibraltar to Africa, cutting off the rock of North Africa and the sands of Israel, Syria, Iraq and Iran before crossing through India and finally completing the circle right to where it began--Beijing. When the Asian and European migrants colonized the New World, they'd take the Industrial Revolution technology with them. This alternate Industrial Revolution would end sometime in the final legs of the 19th century.

The earlier you start, the likelier the odds of mass production. So let us now fast-forward to the point between 1920 and 1940, the first modern Golden Age of Skyscrapers. A steampunkier Industrial Revolution usually means larger, grander buildings, and that would require steel to put them in place. In the 1890s, the Industrial Revolution would be over and palladium glass would be put into experimentation, almost 600 years after the first modern skyscraper. By the 1920s, skyscrapers with palladium glass skeletons would become not just a reality, but a construction craze. Are 30 or so years enough to make palladium affordable enough for mass production? And could they be used as the skeleton of a skyscraper?
 

TheKillerBs

Maester
I have issues with an imperial decree causing change like that, especially as it pertains to religion. I would much sooner expect the heretic to be killled, especially a newly appointed emperor.

As for your actual questions, sure 30 years is enough if there is an economic driving force behind it. Could it be used as the skyscraper's skelly? I have no idea. The needs of a skyscraper's skeleton are different from those of a vehicle or aircraft. You would be better off asking in a structural engineering forum.
 
Top