Nanotechnology-Powered Wiper-Less Windshield 178
fab writes "Italian car designer Leonardo Fioravanti (who worked for Pininfarina for a number of years) has developed a car prototype without windshield wipers. This amazing technological feat is made possible thanks to the use of 4 layers of glass modified using nanotechnology. The first layer filters the sun and repels the water. The second layer, using 'nano-dust' is able to push dirt to the side. The third layer acts as a sensor that activates the second layer when it detects dirt, while the fourth layer is a conductor of electricity to power this complex mechanism. I haven't been able to find an English article, but there is always a google powered translation of the Italian article."
Mama mia thatsa cleana windshielda! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=35202 [google.com]
Ice? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Ice isn't the end of it.. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Back in the day when bottles were made of glass, following a coke truck in the Aussie summer heat was somewhat hazardous.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Ice? (Score:4, Funny)
Your so lucky (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Durability (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
And price (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
If you have ever seen a car accident that busted the windshield, you will probably notice that the glass might be shattered by it is all contained and most likely can all be removed in one piece. Now the side windows and possibly the back window, they usually just shatter and fall in a pile of a
How would this work for snow (Score:1, Insightful)
5 Layers? (Score:5, Funny)
One more is always better, just ask Gillette and anyone with a guitar amp [wikipedia.org].
Obligatory (Score:1, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
In before grammar/spelling nazis.
Cite the 'original' source. (Score:2)
*ahem* Original? (Score:2)
Damn kids...
Permeable first layer? (Score:4, Interesting)
Maybe I'm stupid, and being your typical /.er I didn't RTFA, but how does a second layer deal with dirt? Is the first layer permeable? That's just... weird.
Dare I ask... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Dare I ask... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Dare I ask... (Score:5, Interesting)
Good point and funny reply, and this seems to be a good spot to reveal one of the great secrets of auto maintenance: you can sharpen your windshield wipers and make them last many times longer. All you need is a small piece of fine sandpaper. Get the wiper blade wet (if it's not already), fold the sandpaper into a V shape, and pull it along the edge a number of times. You want to take off the stiff and cracked edge and expose a fresh layer of rubber. I get extra years out of blades this way, though YMMV.
I use a little gadget I bought at a flea market for a dime decades ago, a little piece of sheet aluminum that's mostly handle to hold an inch-long groove like two sides of an inside-out triangular file. Forget the "100 mile-per-gallon carburetor," it's the windshield wiper blade sharpener that's my candidate for great suppressed invention.
Four words (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, yeah, but it's not worth five minutes of your time to save $15? Do you make more than $180 an hour? Besides, I'll bet it takes you longer than that to buy and install new blades. And you'll be reducing your carbon footprint like all the trendy people.
Re: (Score:2)
What I would want is a more permanent sort of rainx coating that's compatible with wipers.
No matter what you will need wipers to physically move the "big" stuff rapidly. While water will roll off a water repellent screen, if there's a big splash of water, wipers can remove it faster than it rolls off or gets b
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Dare I ask... (Score:5, Insightful)
I've been using Rain-X for years and as long as the application is fairly fresh, it's easy to drive in the rain without wipers. I have to say, if I could get a windshield with those repellent properties built in, and the effects were proven to last, I'd happily pay a premium for it.
Re: (Score:2)
If you want to talk about stock crap, how about those tires that come with your new car? It's a
Wait.. how long? (Score:3, Insightful)
It only takes 15 minutes if you count the time it takes to drive to Autozone, which should really be amortized over the other items you're also purchasing. Or you're an auto mechanic working for a dealership doing an inspection and "saving time" by doing that wiper replacement for someone without calling first.
Of the remaining 5 minutes, maybe a minute in total is spent actually removing the assemblies (my wiper arms don't go full up like a normal car, so for me there's a trick t
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I've been using Rain-X for years and as long as the application is fairly fresh, it's easy to drive in the rain without wipers. I have to say, if I could get a windshield with those repellent properties built in, and the effects were proven to last, I'd happily pay a premium for it.
Rain-X makes windshield wiper fluid. You can pay a premium for that.
http://www.rainx.com/Products/Windshield_Washer_Fluids/De-Icer_Bug_Remover.aspx [rainx.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Dare I ask... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Dare I ask... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
From a quick Googling, it looks like some work has been done in this area [freepatentsonline.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Not a problem; CERN is already working on it [slashdot.org].
Re: (Score:2)
Sure they do -- the wiper is a strip of suede or similar material on the back of thumb of the left glove. Works pretty well in mist; in heavy rain you don't need to wipe at all. Something about the orientation of the visor and its proximity to the eyes makes the water not obstruct vision significantly. I've ridden in rain so hard that every car pulled off the road because their wipers couldn't keep up, but I could see just fine.
Anyway, this new four-layer conductive glass technology certainly would not
Re: (Score:2)
Just because it is on glass now doesn't mean the same idea can not be applied to plastics later.
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder... (Score:1)
What about non-water stuff? (Score:4, Insightful)
Will this ultimate wipeless windshield be able to clear it away?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I guess it depends if your front grille and pants are made of some self cleaning nanomaterials...
Re:What about non-water stuff? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
How much fuel would be saved annually... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Great for motorcyclists/cyclists. (Score:4, Insightful)
The gas engine wastes so much power anyway and never runs at optimal that the so called loses are meaningless. 100HP engine can generate 100W of power without any additional fuel costs. Heck, on a bike you generate 100W of power without too much effort. You can only speak of loses with some *efficient* hybrids or electric cars. But then the windshield doesn't need to be powered all the time anyway.
Regardless, this technology may be most helpful in places where wipers are currently not used. For example, motorcycle helmets. Or cycling glasses.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah somebody up the page [slashdot.org] was talking about something called RainX. Making the outer layer hydrophobic seems to be the main trick here.
Re: (Score:2)
While it might be essentially unmeasurable in your fuel bill, so is a single 100W bulb in your electric bill. It doesn't mean that it doesn't count.
Re: (Score:2)
You're really wrong. Back when they first came out, and gas was, iirc, 59 cents a canadian gallon (and not the $1.24 /liter it is today - $4.91 / US gallon or $5.64 / canadian gallon),it was calculated that running lights would cost an extra $25/year in fuel consumption.
Today's running lights take less energy; however, we also drive about 50% more per annum than we did back then, so we still end up consuming at least . Of course, with the hgher price, you're now looking at annual costs easily over $100.0
I for one... (Score:1)
C.O.P.S. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
No more toilet paper (Score:3, Insightful)
But without windshield wipers... (Score:4, Funny)
Familiar... (Score:2)
I'm trying to think what it was.. something by Arthur C. Clarke maybe? This review [nytimes.com] of The Ghost from the Grand Banks mentions "a really satisfactory windshield wiper". Ah yes, Chapter 3, "A Better Mousetrap", "[the Mark V Wave Wiper] doesn't merely keep off water -- it shakes off an
Re: (Score:2)
The Real News (Score:5, Interesting)
Cutlery (Score:2)
Makes absolutely no sense (Score:3, Interesting)
A top layer that repels water. Swell. But how long does that layer last when subjected to your typical environment?
A second layer of microscopic dust that somehow pushes dirt to the side. Can anybody fathom any mechanism for this?
A third layer that's a sensor for dust? WTF?
A fourth conductive layer?
One possible mechanism might be that the fourth layer is charged up to several thousand volts, charging the unwanted dust, then it reverses polarity, repelling the dust. Which might have a chance of working at 0% humidity and very fine dust.
Also note that the gratuitous reference to nanotechnology, which in this context probably refers to what we normally call "powdered ingredients".
A related technology? (Score:2)
http://www.nanoxchange.com/NewsNewsstand.asp?ID=283 [nanoxchange.com]
Why? (Score:2)
For that matter, since he's in Italy, how 'bout volcanic ash, should Vesuvius go up?
And how much does it cost, and how complicated is it to build, install, and maintain, in comparison to a DC motor and the mechanism for wipers?
Note to developer: KISS is the acronym of the day for engineering.
mark
Forget mud... (Score:2)
Yeah, but .... (Score:2)
Or, you can spend a few bucks on RainX (Score:2)
Re:Windshield Dust (Score:4, Funny)
The fifth layer is a bum who skirts the windshield with a windex bottle filled with gutter water, wipes it with a clothe he found, and then you hand him some change from your pocket....
Re:Windshield Dust (Score:4, Funny)
I'm happy to pay them *not* to crap up my windshield.
Re:Windshield Dust (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Windshield Dust (Score:4, Insightful)
snow?
I challenge your nanotech with my ICE SCRAPER!
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
surely they planned for that, right? How much water can these windshields repel? Semi drives by and throws tons of water on my windshield and it'll automatically clear it instantly at highway speeds? My wipers can hardly keep up, i have my doubts about this technology.
Re: (Score:2)
Windshield treatments (Score:5, Informative)
There was also a mental adjustment period for me; water just streams up and over the car, not to the sides, and it seems so wrong to not have wipers sweeping back and forth. The streams going up the windshield were so different from what I was used to that it was distracting and somewhat headache inducing, and it took several rainstorms to get used to it. But now it's wipers that look wrong.
Until you see it from inside, it is hard to believe how well it sheds water splashed up by the semi alongside you, but it is literally almost as clear as having no water on the windshield. It made a believer out of me.
Re: (Score:2)
Have you ever had to chisel your car out from under an inch of ice before attempting to drive to work on that same inch on all the roads? It's fun, dangerous, stupid, and not uncommon in many of the northern states. NY and Penn were particularly fun for this because of the occasional eat-your-car pothole. SD was great for the bee and locust swarms. My
Re: (Score:2)
Some people do, and some don't.
My car is about 10 years old, and so it doesn't.
Some people I know have heated driveways so they don't need to shovel snow in the winter, but in my opinion, that's completely ridiculous. Still, people will live with what they can afford to do regardless of anything else.
Re: (Score:2)
if i still lived in chicago I'd have a heated driveway. What's ridiculous is having to get up a hour early 3 times a week for 3 months so you can use the snow blower on the driveway to get to work. It's about $10/sq ft if you have it installed or you can diy for a quarter of that.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So go pound sand.
Re: (Score:2)
What about ROCKS? How expensive will these things be to replace. You can replace a current windshield for about $200, add in a couple dollars a year for Wipers, a few bucks more for fluid and that's it, just a minor set of replacment and maintenance costs. Replacing one or two windshields during the life of a car isn't too big a burden, but what about when they cost $2000 a pop, and a is a single rock chip capable of disrupting the power flow to the entire or even a
Re: (Score:2)
Why not? I'd love to have clean lungs again.
Re:There's quite a good article (Score:4, Funny)
Yeah. That oughta do it.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Do WHAT to your car? Look man, If cars needed washing the dealer would do it for you before you drove the car off the lot.
And, more seriously, haven't you got better things to do with your life than wash a stupid car? Maybe, once a year, in the springtime if the car is elderly and you live in an area that uses road salt -- or a few times in midsummer if you don't get Summer rainfall. But mostly washing cars is about as fo
Re: (Score:2)
But mostly washing cars is about as foolish a use of time and resource as dealing with a damn lawn.
You, sir, do not know what you are talking about.
If you park your car inside it doesn't matter too much, but if you park it outside then grease (all cars burn oil and shed petrochemicals, even EVs although it's orders of magnitude less) which glues dirt on the car and does not wash off traps water and grit onto the car. When you touch the gritty car it rubs away some of the paint. This is especially important on cars with single-stage paint which has less binder on top of the pigments, which are the thin
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Most paint jobs -- there have been a few exceptions -- will protect the car from corrosion for 20 years in the sun and weather without doing any more than fading a bit.
Basically every car I have ever owned has been in the 20 year age range and every one has had some degree of paint failure.
I am now driving a 1993 Subaru Impreza with dead paint on the roof and hood. Last car was a 1981 Mercedes with dead paint on roof, hood, and trunk, but that's a couple years outside your range (got it two years ago.) Before that I had a 1989 240SX with dead paint on the roof.
The paint job has virtually no affect on resale value after 10-12 years.
You apparently say this because all of your cars have had bad paint and you've never had one with good pain
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)