Can SpaceX Successfully Revolutionize Transportation with the Hyperloop?

  • Context: SpaceX 
  • Thread starter Thread starter eprparadox
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Competition Spacex
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the feasibility and challenges of designing a pod for the Hyperloop, a transportation concept proposed by SpaceX. Participants explore various aspects of physics, engineering, and design considerations necessary for creating a functional pod, including fluid dynamics, propulsion methods, and structural integrity over long distances.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants emphasize the importance of fluid dynamics due to the low pressure environment and the need for air to be displaced for levitation.
  • Control mechanisms are discussed, with some suggesting that active control may not be feasible due to the rapid timescales involved, advocating for passive systems instead.
  • Concerns are raised about the propulsion method, particularly the limited force available from air pressure at 1 millibar, leading to discussions about linear induction motors and battery requirements.
  • Participants highlight the challenge of maintaining alignment and smoothness of the tube, especially considering thermal expansion over long distances.
  • There are discussions about the structural requirements for sealing and accommodating expansion, with various proposed solutions being debated.
  • Some participants express skepticism about the practicality of the Hyperloop concept, questioning the feasibility of Musk's approach given the challenges faced by his other ventures.
  • The idea of using sliding sections and flexible seals for expansion is proposed, though concerns about structural integrity and maintenance of a smooth internal surface are raised.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with no clear consensus on the feasibility of the Hyperloop design or the best approaches to address the engineering challenges. Multiple competing ideas and concerns are presented throughout the discussion.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations related to existing solutions for expansion in other engineering contexts, such as pipelines and bridges, and question their applicability to the Hyperloop design. The discussion also reflects uncertainty regarding the effectiveness of proposed sealing mechanisms and structural designs.

Who May Find This Useful

Individuals interested in transportation engineering, physics, and innovative design concepts may find this discussion relevant, particularly those exploring the challenges of new transportation technologies.

eprparadox
Messages
133
Reaction score
2
SpaceX is hosting an open competition for pod designs to test on the hyperloop 1 mile test-track they're going to build. http://www.spacex.com/hyperloop

My question is this: to even begin THINK about designing a pod the way Elon envisions it, what sort of physics do I need to know? Any textbooks that would help me gain the skillset necessary from a physics perspective? What resources can I go through to help me learn more?

I have no plans to compete in this competition, but I would like to learn so hopefully in the future, I may be able to contribute meaningfully to this.

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I would think two things will be important:

- Fluid dynamics. While the tube will be held at a mere 1 millibar, that's air that needs to get out of the way. Also, air is used for levitation. Getting all that into a compact design will be challenging
- Control. At that speed you will likely have to actively control the pod to keep it perfectly aligned. Any misalignment could be catastrophic.
 
- Finite-element calculations for the mechanical engineering
- some electronics and power management

I would not rely on active controls I think - the timescale is very short. Passive mechanisms are more failproof.
Hard drives are a great example - the head is just a few nanometers above the surface which moves at up to tens of meters per second. That gives a typical timescale of less than a nanosecond - no way to actively control that. The head hovers above the surface based on a tiny layer of air.

It is interesting that Elon Musk does not want to develop that with his companies. He has a good track record of making good ideas successful, so if he thinks this is a good idea, why wouldn't he try to make a product out of it?
 
Another thing will be, what's actually supposed to be the means of propulsion? The tube is at 1 millibar, I.e. 100 Pa. If you wanted to use the air for propulsion, that would constitute the maximum pressure differential on the vehicle, and with a 3m diameter, you get a measly 700N of force. That's not going to accelerate you much, is it?

EDIT: Ah, linear induction motors. So, that will be another challenge, alongside the batteries needed to power those.
 
Last edited:
I expect one of the more difficult problems will be maintaining alignment and internal smoothness of the tube over time and over changing environmental conditions. With the typical temperature variance linear expansion of a steel tube over that 300 mile proposed route is something like a hundred meters, which has to be allowed continuously over all pylon supports due to the near vacuum, and accommodated at the terminals. Most of the other aspects of hyperloop have some similar precedent in other venues: air lift, linear motor drive, air compressors, aerodynamic analysis. But there's nothing very similar at all to this 300 mile gap-less tube.
 
mfb said:
why wouldn't he try to make a product out of it?
The man already has three market changing companies. Tesla still runs at a loss, against $2 gasoline, and is building a single battery factory to double the planet's battery making capacity, though the company has no history of making cells. SpaceX is profitable but the last launch failed explosively, and the first of a kind controlled descents on land have all failed (so far). It's not as if the Musk companies made t-shirts. Now he's to take on first of kind, supersonic ground transport? I think his choice of brainstorming the idea and letting go of it was remarkably sound.
 
A.T. said:
...
So you would need an airtight equivalent of this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breather_switch
I've been pondering the expansion problem since the HL proposal was released. I've not yet seen a workable solution, aside from allowing axial travel and the ~100M expansion (~500 km steel, 20degC) at the terminals. That breather switch used for rail has sliding sections, which can't seal. Gas/fluid pipe typically goes with U sections and the like AFAICT, also not an option for HL.
 
mheslep said:
hat breather switch used for rail has sliding sections, which can't seal.
The sealing doesn't have to be at the sliding interface. It could be outside, encompassing the entire section, where the pipes overlap.

mheslep said:
U sections and the like AFAICT, also not an option for HL.
Well, some high-g loops could make the journey more interesting. ;-)
 
  • #10
A 1/5000 relative expansion makes curves impractical: to limit displacement to 1 meter, the curvature radius can be at most 5 kilometers, which limits speed to 150m/s for 1/2 g horizontal acceleration. Would work, but that is assuming the track is a full circle - an impractical track design for transportation.

Sliding sections plus flexible outside sealing (can be U-shaped) should work.

@mheslep: in other words, he has an excellent track record of marketing unconventional things.
There were rockets that landed again, just the combination with an actual orbital rocket launch is still open (could happen later today for the US / in the night to Tuesday for Europe).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: mheslep
  • #11
A.T. said:
The sealing doesn't have to be at the sliding interface. It could be outside, encompassing the entire section, where the pipes overlap.
That then entails an axial compressible, airtight encompassing section strong enough to hold the vacuum and withstand environmentals. Unless the encompassing section is to also be structurally strong, all the joining sections would have to meet outside the pylon support.

Inside, a smooth surface must be maintained to +/- a few mm, somehow mounted atop the sliding/telescoping sections.

I'm curious about existing, somewhat similar expansion problems. Pipelines, bridges, use non-applicable solutions. Do large pressurized aircraft simply expand nose to tail? Subs? The ISS?
 
Last edited:
  • #12
mfb said:
@mheslep: in other words, he has an excellent track record of marketing unconventional things.
Agreed. And if I read the track record of those unconventionals correctly, they required a great deal of direct attention by the man himself to escape disaster, and the man himself doesn't scale. It's to his credit that he recognizes limits, because many don't.

Kevin Doyle: No, 'cause there are safeguards!

Eddie Morra: Against aggressive overexpansion? There aren't because there are no safeguards in human nature. We're wired to overreach. Look at history, all the countries that have ever ruled the world - Portugal, with its big, massive navy... All they've got now are salt cods and cheap condoms.

[crowd laughs]

Eddie Morra: And Brits? Now they're just sitting in their dank little island, fussing over their suits. No one's stopping and thinking, 'Hey, we're doing pretty well. We got France, we got Poland, we got a big Swiss bank account... You know what? Let's not invade Russia in the winter, let's go home, let's pop a beer and let's live off the interest.'

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1219289/quotes
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
69K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
12K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K