Required electric power to move heavy mass around on big wheel

In summary, the conversation discusses the parameters and requirements for rotating a heavy mass on a big wheel, including the wheel diameter, radius, circumference, mass speed, speed, mass, drive type, and friction. The question is raised whether this motion falls under "Unified Circular Motion" and the conversation delves into the power and motor required to move the object on the wheel. The discussion also touches on the mass distribution and details of the wheel, and the necessary equations and sequence of calculations to determine the power needed for this scenario. The conversation ends with a summary of the energy and power requirements for moving a point mass up 43 meters in 5 minutes without friction.
  • #1
shaks
26
0
Hi guys,

I have one project where I need to rotate heavy mass on big wheel.

Parameters
Wheel diameter: 43 meter
Radius: 21.50 meter
Circumference: 135 meter
Mass speed: 10 minutes per round
Speed: 135 / 600 = .225 m/s
Mass: 344,965 kg
Drive Type: Track around the wheel like roller coaster
Friction: I will add friction later

Is this moving object fall in "Unified Circular Motion"?

I want to find out what power motor required to move object on this wheel. From where start?

Shaks
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #2
Angular momentum is a conservative quantity. Power demand is for overcoming friction only. How fast did you want to spin it up (from zero angular velocity to the ~ .01 rad/s)?
 
  • #3
Bystander said:
Angular momentum is a conservative quantity. Power demand is for overcoming friction only. How fast did you want to spin it up (from zero angular velocity to the ~ .01 rad/s)?

Thanks man for helping me. :)

It is 5 minutes, we don't need to maintain that speed very fast and 5 minutes is fine.

Shaks
 
  • #4
"Rollercoaster?" Didn't think to ask whether there is vertical motion involved --- figured it was like a turntable in a railroad roundhouse. Other necessary detail is mass distribution --- concentrated at the 21.5 m radius, uniform over area of circle, or what?
 
  • #5
Bystander said:
"Rollercoaster?" Didn't think to ask whether there is vertical motion involved --- figured it was like a turntable in a railroad roundhouse. Other necessary detail is mass distribution --- concentrated at the 21.5 m radius, uniform over area of circle, or what?

Yes, its vertical and 43 meter high.

Its like roller coaster loop with same kind of 5 feet wide track. Small cars (just easy name otherwise its just a simple structure to carry mass) will move on track and on each car 15 feet wide steel rod is fixed. 5 feet outside at both sides and equal mass is hanged at both sides. For easy understanding I can say this train and train is carrying mass. Train length is 50% of circumference.

Now I need to find how much bigger electric motor will be sufficient to move this train excluding friction.

Shaks
 
  • #6
Roller coaster loop --- ferris wheel? Balanced?
 
  • #7
Its not ferris wheel, its like roller coaster loop with train track but not balanced. Train length is 50% of circumference it means its not balanced at one time mass will be at one side. If it is rotating close wise then I think actual problem is to calculate required power to move train from bottom to top from left side and then it will automatically drop down from right side. But weight is equally loaded on train at both sides.

Train length is 67.5 meter with equal mass loaded on both sides with equal distance.
 
  • #8
350 tons lifted 40 meters in five minutes is around 700 hp., but do NOT take that number and run with it --- I am a rank amateur when it comes to designing lift bridges, moving steel crucibles, dumping multiple carloads of bulk material or whatever this is intended to do.
 
  • #9
Can you please tell me equation, how to solve this. I mean sequence of equations. So I may see how much power required by changing mass and time, etc.?

First of all what I should need to calculate and how?
 
  • #10
Let me see if I got the scenario right. You have a 43 meter diameter vertical circular track on which you stick a 350 ton train. You want this train to go slowly, at a constant speed, around this track, and you want to know what power the engine needs to accomplish this feat? At the top of the loop, basically the whole weight of the train will be bearing down on this track, are you sure the track, as well as the joints holding the train onto the track, can support this weight?
 
  • #11
Matterwave said:
Let me see if I got the scenario right. You have a 43 meter diameter vertical circular track on which you stick a 350 ton train. You want this train to go slowly, at a constant speed, around this track, and you want to know what power the engine needs to accomplish this feat? At the top of the loop, basically the whole weight of the train will be bearing down on this track, are you sure the track, as well as the joints holding the train onto the track, can support this weight?

Yes, you understand my scenario correctly. Yes track is fine i.e. can hold the weight. From where to start to calculate to know how much electric power motor I needed to run this train? I mean K.E., Force, Work, Power, etc. ?

Which comes first or what's sequence and equation for current scenario?

Thanks in advance for helping me.

Shaks
 
  • #12
shaks said:
Yes, you understand my scenario correctly. Yes track is fine i.e. can hold the weight. From where to start to calculate to know how much electric power motor I needed to run this train? I mean K.E., Force, Work, Power, etc. ?

Which comes first or what's sequence and equation for current scenario?

Thanks in advance for helping me.

Shaks

Well, since you want the train to go at constant velocity, you have to drive the train up half the circular track using a certain amount of energy, which will require power from your engines, and then brake on the way down to prevent the train from free-falling along the track since it would travel much faster than .225m/s under the influence of gravity.

Since you are basically destroying all of the energy you acquired on the first half of the trip by braking during the second half of the trip, you need your engines to constantly put out power during the climb, and your brakes to constantly function during the descent (which is pretty tough on the brakes it would seem). For the most naive scenario, where you are just moving a point mass up 43 meters in 5 minutes, without any friction, without considering the initial accelerating part of the problem, Bystander gave you the answer for the power needed to accomplish such a task. You take the gravitational energy you need to impart to your train ##PE=mgh## and take that and divide by the time you need to impart that energy to obtain the power of the train. The result you get from plugging in your numbers is roughly what Bystander gave, it's 650hp, or 485kW. This means though that your brakes will also be dissipating heat at a rate of 485kW during the descent! This is enough heat to heat up 1 ton of iron by 1 degree Celsius per second. Your brakes better be able to cool off from this!

The scenario is made more complicated by the fact that your train is half the length of your track. This means that for basically all parts of the journey, part of the train will be descending while other parts will be ascending, you could perhaps use the descending part of the train to provide a part of the energy needed to ascend the track. The calculations will become complicated as you have to calculate the forces on each individual section of the train to see how much braking/engine power is needed.

How will the weight be distributed along the train? I assume you have several sections, which carry most of the weight, with some space in between each section? Will the weight be uniformly distributed within each compartment of the train, or will some compartments carry more weight than others? (e.g. the engine might be where a lot of the weight is?)
 
Last edited:
  • #13
1. Weight is equally distributed on the train

Bystander said:
Angular momentum is a conservative quantity. Power demand is for overcoming friction only. How fast did you want to spin it up (from zero angular velocity to the ~ .01 rad/s)?

I set this to same as required normal speed i.e. 10 minutes. It mean if train catches required speed from rest/zero position then still this is fine.

Matterwave said:
PE=mgh

P.E. = 344,965 x 9.8 x 43 meter (here I will set diameter, not 50% of track circumference, right?)
P.E. = 145,254,621Joule
Power = 145,254,621 / 600 seconds (10 minutes, although from bottom to top, time will be 50% of total time)
Power = 242,091 Watt (242 KW)

Are my calculation correct? This is very simple method, I was assuming of calculating force, KE, work, etc but you simply calculated KE and then got power, is this fine?

Please reply back.

Shaks
 
  • #14
shaks said:
1. Weight is equally distributed on the train
I set this to same as required normal speed i.e. 10 minutes. It mean if train catches required speed from rest/zero position then still this is fine.
P.E. = 344,965 x 9.8 x 43 meter (here I will set diameter, not 50% of track circumference, right?)
P.E. = 145,254,621Joule
Power = 145,254,621 / 600 seconds (10 minutes, although from bottom to top, time will be 50% of total time)
Power = 242,091 Watt (242 KW)

Are my calculation correct? This is very simple method, I was assuming of calculating force, KE, work, etc but you simply calculated KE and then got power, is this fine?

Please reply back.

Shaks

I think you should read my previous post more closely. Because this very simple method is neglecting a lot of other factors, some of which I brought up in my previous post. :)

You got half the power needed because you used the whole 10 minutes instead of the 5 minutes it takes to bring the train up to the top.
 
  • #15
Matterwave said:
I think you should read my previous post more closely. Because this very simple method is neglecting a lot of other factors, some of which I brought up in my previous post. :)

You got half the power needed because you used the whole 10 minutes instead of the 5 minutes it takes to bring the train up to the top.

Brother, I am not professional and just trying to work on my project. I will appreciate if you can help me here as you are doing. I mean can you please tell me other neglected factors other than friction because I can add friction later i.e. roughly 10% or 15% or whatever according to you.

P.E. = 344,965 x 9.8 x 43 meter (here I will set diameter, not 50% of track circumference, right?)
P.E. = 145,254,621Joule
Power = 145,254,621 / 300 seconds (5 minutes that's time of 1 side i.e. bottom-top)
Power = 484,182 Watt (484 KW)

So we just calculated Potential Energy and converted into Power.

We did not calculated Force, Torque, K.E., Work, Inertia, etc.?Shaks
 
Last edited:
  • #16
shaks said:
Brother, I am not professional and just trying to work on my project. I will appreciate if you can help me here as you are doing. I mean can you please tell me other neglected factors other than friction because I can add friction later i.e. roughly 10% or 15% or whatever according to you.

P.E. = 344,965 x 9.8 x 43 meter (here I will set diameter, not 50% of track circumference, right?)
P.E. = 145,254,621Joule
Power = 145,254,621 / 300 seconds (5 minutes that's time of 1 side i.e. bottom-top)
Power = 484,182 Watt (484 KW)

So we just calculated Potential Energy and converted into Power. We did not calculated "Force", "K.E.", "Work", Inertia, etc.?Shaks

Power is defined as energy/time so yes you can convert directly from an energy and a time into a power. What we calculated there is the power it takes to move 345tons up a vertical distance of 43 meters, at constant velocity, in 5 minutes. The friction can not be included "later" because without friction your train will drop from the top to the bottom in a much shorter amount of time than 5 minutes. The brakes on your train require friction to function.

The first major thing to consider is that the train is half the length of the track. So start with your train having the midpoint being at the bottom of the track. The head of the train will be halfway up the track, and the tail of the train will be halfway down the track (up the track on the other side). The train is in equilibrium here so to get it moving you need to start moving the head of the train up the track while the tail of the train drops down the track. I'm still not sure how to analyze this situation in a completely correct manner...but that is where I would start my analysis.
 

1. How is the required electric power calculated for moving a heavy mass around on a big wheel?

The required electric power is calculated by multiplying the force needed to move the mass by the velocity at which it is moving. This formula is known as power = force x velocity.

2. What factors affect the amount of electric power needed to move a heavy mass on a big wheel?

The amount of electric power needed is affected by several factors, including the weight of the mass, the size and diameter of the wheel, the friction and resistance of the surface the wheel is moving on, and the speed at which the wheel is moving.

3. How can the efficiency of the electric power be improved for moving a heavy mass on a big wheel?

The efficiency of the electric power can be improved by reducing friction between the wheel and the surface it is moving on, using more powerful electric motors, and optimizing the design of the wheel to reduce resistance. Regular maintenance and proper lubrication can also help improve efficiency.

4. Is there a maximum amount of electric power that can be used to move a heavy mass on a big wheel?

Yes, there is a maximum amount of electric power that can be used to move a heavy mass on a big wheel. This is determined by the strength and capacity of the electric motor and the power source. Using too much power can result in damage to the motor and other components of the system.

5. Can renewable energy sources be used to power the movement of a heavy mass on a big wheel?

Yes, renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, or hydro power can be used to power the movement of a heavy mass on a big wheel. This can help reduce the carbon footprint and make the process more sustainable and environmentally friendly.

Similar threads

  • Mechanical Engineering
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
8K
  • Mechanical Engineering
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • Mechanical Engineering
Replies
10
Views
8K
  • Mechanical Engineering
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Mechanical Engineering
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
23
Views
5K
Replies
4
Views
9K
Back
Top