4 ms·
> The problem with traveling in an evacuated tube is, if you lose the vacuum in the tube, everybody in the tube will crash Wouldn't that be a "crash" into a gr
by geon 11y ago
> The problem with traveling in an evacuated tube is, if you lose the vacuum in the tube, everybody in the tube will crash
Wouldn't that be a "crash" into a gradually rising air preassure? Something like a smooth deacceleration.
- WalterSear 11y agoTurbulence is probably going to be an issue.
- VLM 11y agoI wouldn't worry about an air valve being left open quite as much as the vacuum being broken because a big chunk of concrete (or whatever) is now sucked into the tube in the path of the train. Perhaps in the very unlikely event it ever rains again in California, water in the tube could be an issue, or lightning damage. That brings up the logical question of how many customers you'll have if none of them have any water to drink. Perhaps this would make more sense as a project under the Chicago Regional Transit Authority, or parallel to the existing Acela track on the coast.
- eclipxe 11y agoYeah because CA is going to depopulate because of the drought. Come on be realistic.
- danielweber 11y ago> because a big chunk of concrete (or whatever) is now sucked into the tube in the path of the train 1 atmosphere of pressure isn't going to suck in anything concrete, except maybe in dust format.
- Balgair 11y agoNo. Depending on the failure mode, maybe, but that is not the concern here. A slow leak that the high-vac pumps cannot deal with is a slow deceleration. A massive crack will cause quite the stir in the tube. Think of a balloon. When you inflate a balloon you put, maybe, 1.1 atms more into it. This is about 1/10th that of the hyperloop system. You know how loud even a simple party balloon can be, and the forces that you deal with.
- kbenson 11y agoHyperloop is based on a reduced air pressure tube, not an evacuated tube. Additionally, there's inlets in the front of the capsules to actively move air/pressure from in front to underneath/behind. I don't really know how that alters what you've stated, if at all, but it didn't seem to be addressed, so I figured I would throw it out there.
- Gibbon1 11y agoThe Wikipedia mentions 1 milibar (1/1000 of atm). From a structural standpoint that's a complete vacuum.
- Alchi 11y agoI would not call it gradually rising. Pods would be moving at huge speeds and then hit viscuos fluid (compared with vacuum) It would be like hitting a wall. Pod should be constructed like supersonic jet to avoid crash.
- geon 11y agoLet's say the break is 20 miles away. There is no way all that air would reach you instantly. It would take some time. Several minutes even?
- x3n0ph3n3 11y agoIt doesn't need to be a vacuum, and this problem has been thoroughly covered in the original paper.