Tuesday, April 9, 2013

How does Elon Musk's Hyperloop work? Alluding a fifth mode of transportation..

If it wasn't coming from Elon this might seem like a stretch. Talk about Uncubed thought and putting it out there. 

Over the past year, Elon Musk, billionaire founder of PayPal, Tesla, and SpaceX, has been floating the notion of a "Hyperloop" as a future replacement for bullet trains; one that would get commuters from San Francisco to Los Angeles in as little as 30 minutes. There has been much speculation over how the Hyperloop works, as Musk has revealed very few details. So what has Musk actually said and what might this translate to in the real world?

What has Musk actually revealed about the Hyperloop? Putting together the bits and pieces from his comments over the past year amounts to something of a performance brief for what the Hyperloop would be capable of. In additionOver the past year, Elon Musk, billionaire founder of PayPal, Tesla, and SpaceX, has been floating the notion of a "Hyperloop" as a future replacement for bullet trains; one that would get commuters from San Francisco to Los Angeles in as little as 30 minutes. There has been much speculation over how the Hyperloop works, as Musk has revealed very few details. So what has Musk actually said and what might this translate to in the real world?

What has Musk actually revealed about the Hyperloop? Putting together the bits and pieces from his comments over the past year amounts to something of a performance brief for what the Hyperloop would be capable of. In addition to the killer feature (downtown Los Angeles to downtown San Francisco in 30 minutes), we know that Hyperloop would double the gate-to-gate average speed of an aircraft over that distance, which is 560 km (350 miles). Musk has said Hyperloop is a non-scheduled service which leaves when you arrive, is immune to the weather and never crashes. The only specific technical hints Musk has provided is that it's not a vacuum tunnel, but is a cross between Concorde, a railgun and an air hockey table. This makes quite an impressive list of attributes. Naturally, there is a lot of speculation as to what Musk's Hyperloop must be.

It's clear that he is proposing a system for subsonic transport. Travelling between downtown LA and downtown SF in 30 minutes gives a speed of about Mach 0.91. The same conclusion comes from working out the average speed of an aircraft. Gate-to-gate, the trip between LAX and SFO (337 miles) is listed by the airlines as one hour and 19 minutes, for an average speed of about 255 mph (410 km/h), or about Mach 0.33. Twice this is Mach 0.66.

Business Insider may have been first with its suggestion that the Hyperloop is the old Rand Corporation's Very High Speed Transit System. Unfortunately, this system must run in a vacuum tunnel, which Musk has specifically ruled out. In addition, failure of the control computer would allow cars in the Rand system to collide, which seems to conflict with Musk's claim that the Hyperloop capsules can never crash. The same issue also argues against the popular suggestion that the Hyperloop is essentially a version of the ET3 maglev system.

Another favorite idea is that Musk's Hyperloop may be some version of aLofstrom Loop, otherwise known as a launch loop. Originally proposed for launching payloads into orbit, a Lofstrom Loop is in essence a vacuum sheath measuring thousands of kilometers long that contains a rotor of iron or other magnetic material. The rotor is magnetically levitated within the sheath, and rotates around the loop at a speed well in excess of the orbital velocity at the Earth's surface (7.9 km/s, or 17,700 mph). The rotor velocity assumed in design studies is usually around 14 km/s (35,000 mph). An external capsule is linked to the loop magnetically, so that it accelerates to the speed of the rotor within the sheath.

A Lofstrom Loop is a much to be desired system for future transporation, but is not a Hyperloop (Image: <a href="Keith Lofstrom" target="_blank">LaunchLoop</a> CC 3.0)

Because the rotor is moving faster than orbital velocity, it is pushed away from the Earth's surface by centrifugal force. The maximum altitude of the loop is defined by the length of tethers that attach the sheath to the ground. In the original designs, the top portion of the loop would be around 80 km (50 miles) above the ground, but a loop could be built with an altitude of 100 meters, if there were a reason.

Such a loop could be used for travel between points on the Earth's surface as easily as it can launch payloads. But going by what Musk has said, the Hyperloop does not seem to be a Lofstrom Loop.

The distance from downtown LA to downtown SF is about 560 km (350 miles) as the crow flies. The hypersonic rotor within the loop stretches that distance in both directions, so would be more than twice that length, say around 1,200 km (750 miles). This rotor would have the equivalent energy of about a four-megaton thermonuclear bomb, which some might deem less than ideal in a downtown location. And, use of a Lofstrom loop for subsonic travel between cities is out of proportion to the task. The rotor has to be moving well in excess of escape velocity to suspend the loop in the air. If it is slower, the Lufstrom loop lies on the ground, where it can propel a ground-based bullet train, and encounter all the usual problems.

So if Musk's Hyperloop isn't in a vacuum tunnel, and isn't a Lofstrom Loop, what is it?

The most interesting of Musk's statements is that the Hyperloop is a cross between the Concorde, a railgun, and an air hockey table. The Concorde was fast and revolutionary for personal transport, a railgun uses electromagnetic forces to transport objects at high speeds, and an air hockey table reduces sliding friction to next to nothing. These concepts all pull together to make the Hyperloop.

Diagram of a PTS system conceived as a possible modus operendi for the Hyperloop (Image: Brian Dodson/Gizmag)

It could be that the Hyperloop is essentially a pneumatic transport system (PTS) in the form of a closed tube that loops between Los Angeles and San Francisco. People ride in capsules that travel within the tube at around 1,000 km/h (620 mph), but the air in the tube also moves at that speed, so the capsules move with very little air drag. Such a system is simpler to design if the airflow is subsonic, which is in agreement with Musk's claims.

The airflow would lose energy against the inner walls of the tube, so those are perforated with tiny jets that are supplied with high pressure air, which act as do the jets on an air hockey table to dramatically reduce the friction. The separation between capsules makes an air cushion that prevents capsules from colliding in the tube, and the air jets on the inside of the tube levitate the capsules within the tube.

Because the air is moving at the same rate as are the capsules, the air can be kept moving by using the capsules as "paddles" to push the air along faster. The simplest way of doing this is to use the capsules as the armature of sections of the tube equipped to act as linear magnetic drive segments. That is, as railgun projectiles. If the capsules are forced to travel faster, so is the airflow. Power failure? Hook the drive units up backward to pull electric energy out of the PTS.

Another unusual aspect of the Hyperloop is that you leave right when you arrive. This is another role for a railgun. Imagine you arrive at the PTS station, and climb into a waiting capsule. In order to merge your capsule into the tube, it has to be moving at the same speed so it can be directed into the tube with a minimum of fuss. Since the capsules are going to work with electromagnetic drive units in any case, why not speed them up in the same manner? Of course, stopping at your destination is just the inverse of the merging process.

A serious concern in high-speed ground transportation is to keep the g-loads small enough for the general population. A plane taking off can generate about a g of acceleration, so let's take that as our limit. To accelerate a capsule to 1,000 km/h (620 mph) for insertion into the tube at one g of acceleration takes a track about 4.5 km (2.8 mi) in length, which is long, but not a substantial fraction of the tube's length.

When travelling at 1,000 km/h (620 mph), the tightest curve radius keeping accelerations at one g is about 9 km (5.6 mph). This is a more difficult limit to arrange, as it means the track of the tube must be very nearly straight. Building such a PTS on the space between the opposing lanes of a highway system won't work, save perhaps in very flat states. The biggest challenge is likely to be finding a place to put such a PTS.

The air between capsules acts as cushions to prevent two capsules from colliding within the tube. However, what happens in a catastrophic failure, such as total power loss? The first change is that the air hockey levitation of the capsules becomes ineffective. This can be prepared for by placing a series of small wheels on the sides of the capsules. The second change is that the drag force on the walls of the tube increases to its usual level, causing the air and the entrained capsules to come to a rather slow stop.

The PTS system as described above is my candidate for how Elon Musk's Hyperloop will function. Obviously there are numerous technical, practical, and political problems in setting up such a system, but it would work, and might not be terribly expensive, at least compared to the California bullet train project. We should find out his plans in the next month or so.





 to the killer feature (downtown Los Angeles to downtown San Francisco in 30 minutes), we know that Hyperloop would double the gate-to-gate average speed of an aircraft over that distance, which is 560 km (350 miles). Musk has said Hyperloop is a non-scheduled service which leaves when you arrive, is immune to the weather and never crashes. The only specific technical hints Musk has provided is that it's not a vacuum tunnel, but is a cross between Concorde, a railgun and an air hockey table. This makes quite an impressive list of attributes. Naturally, there is a lot of speculation as to what Musk's Hyperloop must be.

Article by Brian Dodson

Tuesday, March 12, 2013

Can Google or Microsoft Save The Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant?


Topic; Kewaunee Nuke Plant and why a tech company like Google, Amazon, or even Berkshire could be the buyer it needs.

The decision to close a perfectly good Nuclear Plant - Really? Let’s think about this.
    • Jobs - the loss of 700 to 1100 high paying jobs in a state that desperately needs them. Wisconsin Governor where are you?
    • With North American population projected to increase by over 100 million by 2050 I’m pretty sure we’ll need more power plants, not less. (Tech companies use a massive amount.)
    • It’s reported that it’s takes 7-9 years just to get a permit to build one of these things and costs range from from $3 - $9 billion. And this one is good to go and has a license that is good for another 20 years. Surely a buyer is out there. (See below).
    • Let’s get off this dinosaur train of thinking and do some real planning for the future. Think ‘uncubed’ as we like to say.
Plant Buyers - Possible buyers and why? Let’s exhaust every option. A few ideas on top of my mind. Possible motivated companies with the financial means to take over the current and future responsibility of owning one of these things. (Federal law states that something like $400 million has to be set aside for future decommissioning - hopefully long into the future.)
  • Tech companies. They use a massive amount of power and are now placing server farms (data centers) near new power plants. Some are investing in clean energy. One in particular has a stated goal of reducing its carbon footprint to zero.
  • Server Farms drive this idea.  Also known as Data Centers serve up your information on the internet and they use a massive amount of power. - And they are a hot growth industry.

  • Global Internet Traffic Projected to Quadruple by 2015 See Cisco

  • $1.5 Billion dollar project looking for a home. The race for data centers is a nationwide phenomenon, but perhaps nowhere has the contest for facilities been as fierce as in the heartland, where states are eager to lure tech, both to modernize their economies and shed their ag-state images.1
  • Council Bluffs got Google, which opened Iowa's first big brand-name data center, a 57-acre, $600 million investment, in 2009. He acknowledges he did nothing special. The company liked the city's geography, the proximity it offered to a new coal power plant, and those incentives, which were first crafted for Google's sake -- at the time, it was not known the company was Google -- and rushed through the Iowa legislature in 2007. Council Bluffs ranks as the least expensive place to operate a data center in an index of 39 cities, calculated by the Boyd Company.1
  • A New Industry in the Arctic: Server Farms Facebook’s investment will be a boon to Luleå’s economy, and server farms could be a new source of economic growth throughout the rest of the circumpolar north.2
Examples:
    • Google. Google has, and is building server farms (data centers) across the globe. Google as a company currently uses a massive amount of power. Clean power.
      • Estimates my team came up with suggest these use what would be about  ½ the power output of the Kewaunee Plant. One scenario - They could take it private and build many of their future data centers right in Kewaunee County, WI. Saving one industry giant and spurring the growth of another.
      • Google has a investment entities that are involved in various related efforts. Google has invested about $178 million in one of the worlds largest solar farms now being built.
      • Tech Crunch (Technology Blog) has reported that google already has a investment in Nuclear efforts.
      • Google resources. GooG has approx. $48 billion on hand in cash and short term securities for strategic opportunities
    • Microsoft.
      • Microsoft another tech company with massive resources and massive power use has a stated goal of having zero carbon footprint.
      • Microsoft too has massive server farms (data centers). One server farm building thats serves up data for the Bing search engine has 48 diesel generators around it to power it when the grid goes down. That is one building and Bing has only about 6% of search.
      • Bill Gates too has invested in Nuclear power and has a investment to build modern nuclear in China. Terra Power
      • Microsoft building a poop powered data center.
      • At Microsoft, we (they) believe that we have a responsibility to minimize our impact on the environment, and so we have made a commitment to become carbon neutral beginning in our fiscal year (FY) 20132 for our data centers, software development labs, offices, and employee air travel. Powering the future.
      • MSFT - Microsoft has resources. It has about $64 billion on hand in cash and short term securities for strategic opportunities.
    • Apple
    • Amazon
Amazon has some of the biggest and the most servers farms of all. They are growing their data Amazon Web Services amazingly fast.They also have massive resources.



    • Others Companies that already own Nuclear Power Plants. Maybe one takes the long term view.
    • The City of Chicago. They are very much interested in cleantech and not that far from Kewaunee. And they need lots of power.
    • The Federal Government buys it on the cheap. Turns it over to the citizens of Northeast Wisconsin. There are loaning money for nuclear construction.

Plant Stays Open.
    • A clean source of massive power- generation remains.
    • Many, many great jobs, careers really remain in area.
    • Economic activity that this employment affords will continue.
    • Risk profile stays the same. Plant has been here for 35 years already.
    • WPS embraces that they are truly a ‘Public Service” (Defn. a service rendered in the public interest) not buying local power losing this many jobs - hardly a ‘public service’. Maybe they (WPS) should lower their internal cost structure.

Plant Closes.
      • This will create a very painful economic vacuum in the region. A big negative economic multiplier. Check out the studies.
      • Regret - when natural gases prices spike in the future, Dominion Inc. will say, dang, we shouldn't have closed that one.
      • Risk. The area will have all of the risk of the plant and none of the upside (see above). This would really suck.
      • The carbon has already ready be created/released during this massive construction now close it and have to build a ‘new’ one in 10 years somewhere else. Very stupid. I have two young daughters who future will be determined by doing things smarter.


    I’m guessing that somewhere in this big world a buyer exists. As this move if it happens will be devastating to our area - Maybe the Feds/State/Courts should apply an injunction and put this action on hold until all avenues are exhausted.  Thanks, Perry

    Resources
         1 American Plains A War For Server Farms  From Fortune.
    2 A New Industry in the Arctic: Server Farms
     
    Anything is possible...

    Contacts; Expert on this issue.
    Richard C. Nelson  Owner/Engineer  RNR Services, LLC
    rnr_llc@itol.com   920.255.2926
     _________________________
    Post From;

    Contact Info:
        Perry Andropolis
    Uncubed StudiosSM
    920.724.1698
    Linkedin.
    .

    Thursday, February 14, 2013

    MESSING WITH ELON - NOT A BRIGHT WRITER - Tesla's Gotcha Blog Catches New York Times Reporter Driving In Circles

    Tesla and the Team are obviously building a incredible automobile. Applying Uncubed thought to the whole industry as it 'was' known. I can't wait to work with this company starting with a Supercharger station at our next venture. But as for this writer - wasn't that tablet embedded in the dash a give away that maybe just maybe this "MT Car Of The Year" just might have some advanced features like Tesla's ability to know what you are doing.
    Elon knock em' dead.

    Perry Andropolis



    GO AHEAD, TAKE A TRIP

    Charge in minutes, not hours. And it's free.
    Tesla Superchargers are placed along well-traveled routes in North America. Nine stations are currently active, expanding to over 100 stations in 2015. They’re designed to give road trippers half a charge in about half an hour. That’s 150 miles of range with our 85 kWh battery.
    Plus, Superchargers are located at places you’ll actually want to stop, like roadside diners, cafes, and shopping centers. So pull in, plug in, and grab a bite to eat. Model S will be ready when you get back.

    Friday, September 21, 2012

    Thursday, September 6, 2012