Tubular rail

[mg1942]

Intriguing technology. It would be interesting to see ballpark estimates of Tubular Rail total costs per mile/km, compared to other approaches.


http://www.tubularrail.com/video.htm
I saw this link somewhere in Huffington post comments section.

[Aoie_Emesai]

The concept seems intriguing but I don't think something like the United States is adventurous enough to pursue this yet...

We are looking at this as a mass transit system, and the system of the united states is mostly motor driven vehicle such as personal Cars. I live about 40 miles out of the State Capitol and only within from the city itself to about 20miles even have a mass transit system. I won't name it cause ya might find out where I live

Other cities like NYC could use it but the city is already so over developed a creation of another mass transit system would be an entire overhaul of the city. People can't think of long term savings but rather the up front cost and and the near near future.

While the idea was pretty neat, the implementing of this idea would be on a smaller scale.

[Vexx]

Wa... this is so fscking cool...

The interesting thing is the lack of tracks make it *much* easier to roll out new lines. But yes.... it needs a pilot project somewhere like Disney World before someone is going to risk public dollars on it.

[Clarste]

While I can't see this replacing existing infrastructure, the concept would certainly be attractive for new train systems in the future. Cities that never had any sort of transit system (other than buses) might decide that this one's worth it if it turns out to be cheap enough.

[Spectacular_Insanity]

I don't get it. What's the point? What does this system do that a normal bullet train system doesn't?

[Clarste]

Originally Posted by Spectacular_Insanity

I don't get it. What's the point? What does this system do that a normal bullet train system doesn't?

It reduces the cost of placing rails. Well, that's what I got out of it.

[-KarumA-]

it looks awesome but I am afraid whether or not it would be possible lol
like the roundhouse animation, I would be more afraid that those parts between the centre and edges would break or collapse, the weight might be split in two but it is still very heavy and gratify will pull most at those 2 parts. Also why it would never work, to move a rail with 4 trains inside takes a damned load of energy which would just add to the costs, it may be cheaper laying tracks but to move everything it costs a lot more over time.

edit:
This guy does some nice promo talk lol, he says it is cheaper to do the tracks but he never once mentions how is going to move that darned bookcase of trains =P
Also I just realised, when the train is up at speed how the heck is he going to slow it down like that lol since the wheels are in the poles the train would eventually just slide over them and if it uses breaks through a railing system through a kind of staircase blockade it would have to be replaced more than usual, like a train that uses the emergency break but with less power and with more regular use, I am quite interested in how his break system works lol cause once again nice promo material but no mentions on things that actually matter for investment

[Sides]

Originally Posted by Clarste

It reduces the cost of placing rails. Well, that's what I got out of it.

And also maintenance of the railtracks. Nice idea, but i doubt that a prototype or a trial would be build in that kind of form/structure shown in that video. However you can take some of those ideas and incorporate it in existing systems.

[Quarkboy]

Here's the problem with the idea, and it's a big problem:

What breaks easier in a normal train? The rail or the wheel that runs on the rail?

Answer: The wheel, by a longshot.

In a normal train system when a wheel or motor breaks down on a train car it is compensated for by other wheels on the train car or in worst case you can tow it off to a service track with a helper locomotive and then fix it.

But in this design the "wheels" and "motors" are on these individual platforms and if one starts malfunctioning you'd have to literally shut down the entire line until it gets fixed. You essentially have a bazillion independent driver AC motors in each pillar that would all have to be maintained constantly and that cannot be moved, unlike in a normal train system where the trains can be serviced in a single trainyard regularly.

It's an upkeep nightmare that would be impossible to maintain because you'd have to ensure reliability of unreliable components over long distances.

The reasons railroads work well is that the track is extremely stable and easy to maintain over long distances, because it has no moving parts and breaks only due to the stress of the trains moving over it. On the other hand the motors and cars themselves constantly are in need to servicing to make sure they operate properly.

I also have questions about how you transmit power over long distances in such a way that you manage to power all those motors in an energy efficient way, since they'll basically need to turn on and off as a train passes by, which seems wasteful compared to a motor in the car itself just being on continuously.

[Sides]

Originally Posted by Quarkboy

The reasons railroads work well is that the track is extremely stable and easy to maintain over long distances, because it has no moving parts and breaks only due to the stress of the trains moving over it. On the other hand the motors and cars themselves constantly are in need to servicing to make sure they operate properly.

I'm pretty sure tracks can fail due to fatigue and creep.
That Tubular rail can, if i'm not mistaken, only be propelled, so i don't think it can actually go through bends, probably the reason why they want it operating in an elevated enviroment. Honestly it is a nice idea, just for novelty values, but if the inventors want to sell it as an alternative way of commuting, then they are probably living in lalaland, or they want to pull off something like that simpsons monorail episode.

[Vexx]

wah.. missed that part... the motive power is in the rings??? Not the train itself?
If that is the case, yeah, too many fail points. And the non-moving solutions I can think of significant other issues.

Will go back and read the site more closely but 'power in the rings' doesn't seem to cut it on first thought.

[Quarkboy]

Originally Posted by Vexx

wah.. missed that part... the motive power is in the rings??? Not the train itself?
If that is the case, yeah, too many fail points. And the non-moving solutions I can think of significant other issues.

Will go back and read the site more closely but 'power in the rings' doesn't seem to cut it on first thought.

Yeah, that's what it says... It says the rail is fixed in the car and the rings are in the towers...

Another consideration is temperature variation... The kind of precision you'd need with the tower placement and the car track alignment would require the train be a very specific shape, so with a small shift in the relative position of the towers you'd have misalignment issue that would cause serious friction and speed loss if it wasn't built with enough tolerance... But the more tolerance you have for it the less stable the ride would be...

Frankly I see far too many issues that don't seem to outweigh simply connecting the pillars with a concrete bridge and making a damn monorail out of it.

[-KarumA-]

Originally Posted by Quarkboy

In a normal train system when a wheel or motor breaks down on a train car it is compensated for by other wheels on the train car or in worst case you can tow it off to a service track with a helper locomotive and then fix it.

This is also a good point cause I presume that even if they have double tracks the train can't switch tracks while ridding, you'd need one of those huge construction wheels like in the animation

Let alone a train infrastructure could not function without switching tracks, the animation for the switch is fast but as I have mentioned before it would have to take a huge load of energy to do so and they haven't mentioned how they were going to move that platform, only that the wheels and trains will run on electricity. You'd need a huge engine to make that platform swirl let alone lift a train bookcase and I wonder if it could withstand that and then I haven't even wondered about exhaust fumes from that engine.

Another pointer was already said as well and that is the fact that the train has to be one line, so any shift in height of the towers can already cause an immediate danger to the passengers, so who is going to check those towers every once in a while =P and lastly not every landscape is of the same height, is it going to bypass every mountain, in Europe that wouldn't be handy at all cause then you can add at leased a day to travel hours if you were to travel around lets say the Alps

[Vinak]

I simply can't see this system being practicle at all.

the cost of laying rail would just be replaced by building "hoops"

Instead of 1-2 engine cars, each hoop would require an engine which would increase power consumption, building costs and maintenance.

The rails being attached to the cars themselves would run the risk of damaging or even derailing the cars if the alignment is off by just a few millimeters.

The rails would need some kind of laser targeting system to guarantee perfect alignment with the upcoming hoop. They will also need to come up with a method of safely bringing the train to a stop before it reaches the next hoop in order to prevent damage or derailment. which is simply impossible. Even if you can bring a train to a complete stop in a short amount of time, you still run the risk of injuring passengers or damaging cargo with the sudden stop.

Today's conventional Rail system allows each rail segment to be attached to a electrical current, allowing the railing company to know if any rail is missing or out of alignment before a train is on the tracks.

The concept is very cool, but it needs some tweaking.

Originally Posted by -KarumA-

edit:
Also I just realised, when the train is up at speed how the heck is he going to slow it down like that lol since the wheels are in the poles the train would eventually just slide over them and if it uses breaks through a railing system through a kind of staircase blockade it would have to be replaced more than usual, like a train that uses the emergency break but with less power and with more regular use, I am quite interested in how his break system works lol cause once again nice promo material but no mentions on things that actually matter for investment

Electromagnetic breaking could be applied here. the breaking disks won't actually come into contact with one another, allowing breaking at faster speeds and reducing maintenance costs.

but their are still many other problems.

ah, a Q&A section.

Originally Posted by tubular rail website

How does the Tubular Rail car stop?
The braking system (non emergency) of the Tubular Rail system will rely on the creation of friction between the braking device and the resistance plate on the column. However most routine braking is done by controlling the speed at which the rollers are rotating and when coming into a station the rollers actually serve to regenerate energy back to the grid.

[Claies]

So basically, they're making a route out of a gigantic coilgun. With curves. And the projectile has passengers in it. This is very unsettling if you think about it like that.

Physical fatigue when the train is in only one hoop (the minimum has to be no more than one if they want the thing to turn) is quite frightful. I'm also terribly uncomfortable with their explanation with how the train should turn. Going through a steel/concrete hoop when you're clinging on to nearly nothing while turning asks for too many disasters with respect to accuracy.

Also, maintenance is actually less efficient because crews now have to climb every single hoop individually, driving around the city from one to another. You can at least drive over conventional rails with a maintenance cart or something.

I'm also worried about overhead clearance with respect to things below. What if some smart-aleck such as a double-decker bus driver (or a bird, really) decides that if a train isn't going by he can pass in between two hoop towers?

Just lay the goddamn rails instead of ring road upon ring road. It's so much better when it comes to cities.

(In before some environmentalist crying about how birds would perch in that hoop and turn into mush)

[Vexx]

You've just solved the pigeon problem!

[Claies]

Originally Posted by Vexx

You've just solved the pigeon problem!

Fatigue: I read that as the "pigeonhole principle". Too many proofs today.

[Aoie_Emesai]

We just need to reinvent the wheel or eliminate it entirely. That is our answer.

Hum... one fat person might unbalance the train...

[Claies]

Actually, I support this idea, in case superheroes get lazy.

Spoiler for :

I don't know, I feel antagonistic today.

[escimo]

Interesting idea... On the surface.

AC motors in each hoop seems like a brilliant solution to a problem that shouldn't exist in the first place. Can't really see that as a viable option. Granted, industrial grade AC motors are pretty much rock solid these days but still bearings tend to fail and that's really the worst thing that can happen to a train with propulsion system such as that.

Maybe applying a magnetic propulsion system similar to maglev but then again can't see why you would build this instead of an actual maglev.

Actually reminds me a bit of grid powered electric cars that someone was proposing in the seventies. (if I remember correctly) A few notable and significant pros and massive amount of overwhelming cons.

Anyway now that the idea is out there maybe someone will refine some viable solution out of it.