4 ms·

Maglev, huh. Does that imply the track has to have embedded coils / permanent magnets? If so, seems like that pretty much explodes the cost, no?

by tbabb 11y ago

om42 11y ago
There were a couple designs at Design Weekend including MIT's design where they use passive magnetic system instead of the active magnetic systems (Maglev) found on most high speed trains. By inducing Eddie-currents, they don't have to rely on embedded coils, just permanent magnets. Supposedly the teams using the passive magnetic system say the costs are low enough currently since you save power (no high power usage) and don't need to lay out specialized coils on the track. There are couple difference designs that will be tested at Design Weekend, including the air bearings proposed in the alpha paper along with magnets and wheels.
- tbabb 11y ago
  Curious what the heat losses are on eddy currents. I guess we'll see...
InclinedPlane 11y ago
It's not maglev. For fuck's sake, can people at least read the wikipedia entry on the topic before commenting on it? It uses an air cushion to reduce friction, it uses linear induction motors to accelerate trains along a route, most of the time it will cost. That means the fixed costs of the whole thing are low. The cars are pretty simple and low cost. The accelerators are also simple and make up a tiny fraction of the length of a track. Most of the track is just a partially evacuated tunnel, which is cheaper to build than a maglev track.
- tbabb 11y ago
  > It's not maglev Oh wow, this is too much. From the article: > "The MIT pod has magnet skis that lift it during high-speed cruising" So, in your own words, "For fuck's sake, can people at least read the article before commenting on it?" The was the whole reason I brought it up. The original design called for air bearings; the MIT team did something apparently far more expensive. This is concerning.
  - Already__Taken 11y ago
    Air bearings require a fairly tight tolerance as to the design of the tube for the entire run no? So I don't think it's a given magnets could be more costly if it means you use more expensive track materials but not a high precision construction. Any with air bearings or magnets both being a passive track on-going costs might favor the one geological events disrupt less.
- tedsanders 11y ago
  Please be kinder to others. Although the Hyperloop concept uses an air cushion for levitation, the winning pod from MIT was indeed levitated by magnets: http://news.mit.edu/2016/mit-students-win-first-round-spacex-hyperloop-contest-0201 http://news.mit.edu/2016/mit-students-win-first-round-spacex...

Maglev, huh. Does that imply the track has to have embedded coils / permanent magnets? If so, seems like that pretty much explodes the cost, no?

by tbabb 11y ago

Maglev, huh. Does that imply the track has to have embedded coils / permanent magnets? If so, seems like that pretty much explodes the cost, no?

om42 11y ago

There were a couple designs at Design Weekend including MIT's design where they use passive magnetic system instead of the active magnetic systems (Maglev) found on most high speed trains. By inducing Eddie-currents, they don't have to rely on embedded coils, just permanent magnets. Supposedly the teams using the passive magnetic system say the costs are low enough currently since you save power (no high power usage) and don't need to lay out specialized coils on the track. There are couple difference designs that will be tested at Design Weekend, including the air bearings proposed in the alpha paper along with magnets and wheels.

tbabb 11y ago
Curious what the heat losses are on eddy currents. I guess we'll see...

InclinedPlane 11y ago

It's not maglev. For fuck's sake, can people at least read the wikipedia entry on the topic before commenting on it? It uses an air cushion to reduce friction, it uses linear induction motors to accelerate trains along a route, most of the time it will cost. That means the fixed costs of the whole thing are low. The cars are pretty simple and low cost. The accelerators are also simple and make up a tiny fraction of the length of a track. Most of the track is just a partially evacuated tunnel, which is cheaper to build than a maglev track.

tbabb 11y ago
> It's not maglev Oh wow, this is too much. From the article: > "The MIT pod has magnet skis that lift it during high-speed cruising" So, in your own words, "For fuck's sake, can people at least read the article before commenting on it?" The was the whole reason I brought it up. The original design called for air bearings; the MIT team did something apparently far more expensive. This is concerning.
- Already__Taken 11y ago
  Air bearings require a fairly tight tolerance as to the design of the tube for the entire run no? So I don't think it's a given magnets could be more costly if it means you use more expensive track materials but not a high precision construction. Any with air bearings or magnets both being a passive track on-going costs might favor the one geological events disrupt less.
tedsanders 11y ago
Please be kinder to others. Although the Hyperloop concept uses an air cushion for levitation, the winning pod from MIT was indeed levitated by magnets: http://news.mit.edu/2016/mit-students-win-first-round-spacex-hyperloop-contest-0201 http://news.mit.edu/2016/mit-students-win-first-round-spacex...