How to build a true "Tubo lift" (Technology)

[Code_Name_D]

How to build a true "Tubo lift"

How do you make an elevator car go sideways? Simple put it on rails. The only problem with this solution is that now it can never go up and down. Looking at it that way, you could say that we have had "side ways" going elevators for some time. We only call them trains.

But a turbo lift, at least one defined in Star Trek, is an elevator car that can travel in all directions. It can not only go up and down, but left, right, forewords, and backwards as well. Only that no one has been able to figure out how to do it. Well, lacking a life of my own, I have been giving the mater some thought.

Here is what I have come up with thus far.

First off, we start with the car.
Using east, west, north, south, we would have conventional elevator exits located in the north and south of the passenger car. Conventionl that you have two sets of doors. One set built on the far, and the other set built into the structure or "receptacle." The car would have to line itself up to the receptacle to depart its passengers. Underneath the car is a set of convention rail trolleys, including a standard third rail to provide power. This trolley would allow the car to displace itself east and west.

Now in each of the four corners facing outwards, is a set of three rubber wheals, not unlike that of a car tire, mounted to a wheal assembly or VTA (Vertical Traction Assembly). (In fact, a car tire would be an ideal wheal.) The VTA would then be mounted to a VSDR or Vertical Suspension/Drive Rack. This gives a total of twelve VTA's, with three VTA's for each VSDR. This builds in a redundancy, so that if one VTA should suffer a critical failure, the other two will still permit the car to lower itself to safety.

Construction of a VTA; Vertical Traction Assembly, and the VSDR; Vertical Suspension/Drive Rack.
Each VTA would be made in the following manner. First the traction tire. As I said before, a conventional auto tire and hub would be ideal. The hub would then be mounted to a brake/clutch assembly built in such a way that the brake is passively engaged. Unlike an automobile brake where the brake at rest is retracted, this brake will be fully engaged when at rest, most likely powered by a spring or exotic material. The brake/clutch would then be connected to a drive motor, and then in turn connected to a steering mechanism that would align the VTA to the elevator shaft track. From there, the assembly would be mounted onto the VSDR. The VSDR consist of an arm that holds the VTA against the elevator track, and again should be passively powered by a spring/shock absorber.

The VSDR will press the VTA against the vertical elevator track. With twelve in place, the car would be able to suspend itself vertically. That is one reason for the rubber tire as friction will play a vital role. The Brake/Clutch assembly would then keep each wheal immobile, preventing an uncontrolled decent. The VSDR would also have a landing arm that could swing out and be planted on a landing platform or hook eye, adding another layer of safety when the car is parked.

Ascending / Descending
When the car is ordered to move up or down, the following things happen. First, power must be applied to the drive motor. Only when the motor is applying sufficient torque, will power then bee applied to the brake/clutch assembly to retract the brake. If the landing arm has been deployed, the car will then lift far enough to retract the arm. Then, the car is resting on the torque provided by the twelve drive motors, maintaining a "neutral bouncy." From there, the car can make an assent or decent.

Horizontal movement.
At the bottom of the vertical elevator shaft will the horizontal running tracks. As the car fully descends, it will settle itself onto the horizontal tracks. Once fully "landed", power will be applied to the VSDR's to over come the passive springs pressing them outward, then locked into place. The power supply will then switch from the vertical track, to the horizontal track. The car is now free to move horizontally, now behaving like a small subway car.

The process can easily be reverse. When the car is ordered to assigned, it will move to position itself at the bottom of the shaft, then deploy the VSDRs, then switch to the vertical shaft's power supply, and it will be able to ascend.

Horizontal travel at the top of the shaft is possible as well, but would be a bit more complex, assuming it was designed to swing up a set of horizontal tracks under the car, then lock them into place. The car could then descend onto the elevated horizontal tracks. Do this, and you could have cars moving up a one shaft, then descending down another. You could also place several cars in one shaft, or even shuffle the cars to have them "hop" out of order.

Fire protocol.
One problem with conventional elevators is in order to accommodate the cables, the shaft has to be left unobstructed. This makes the shaft itself a fire hazard as it acts like a giant chimney that ventilates the fire and smoke.

With a self powered H-V Car, fire doors could be opened and closed every few floors, with each door being opened only to allow a car to pass, then closing behind it. This could possibly allow such a car to be more reliable and safer to use in times of emergency. This was one problem encountered with the World Trade Center. Once the plains impacted, they very quickly took out the elevators, removing the fastest means to evacuate the building. If the cars were independent of any suspension cables, then the cars beneath the crash sight would still be able to function, and possibly aid with the evacuation.

[Don_G]

1. I Wouldn't Use Rubber Tires

More like geared wheels like a rack-and-pinion system. Much better traction and it can be used like a subway to power the elevator cab itself through electrified rails.

The emergency braking system is simplicity itself: an adaptation of the disc brakes on your car.

[Code_Name_D]

3. I have considered a rack and pinion system, and found them problmatic.

Your concerns are obvious. The desire to prevent an uncontrolled decent should the car suffer a catastrophic failure, or sudden loss of power. And while your argument is worth further exploration, I have found some problems with it. The first problem is ware. Such a system would have extreme levels of ware on both the primary supporting gear, as well as the track itself. Second is that such a system would be more prone to other forms of failure modes, such as a broken tooth on either the main gear or on the track itself, all thought not necessarily less so than say a flat tire. Third is the cost to the elevator track, the more expensive it is to make the shaft tracks, the less feasible the system would be over all. And forth would be that such a system would be noisy, and present a rough ride for the passengers. A fifth problem would be vertical load on the track itself as the track would not just have to support the car, but the track above it. Sixth, such a system would have to align itself with the elevator track before it could engage, or risk damage to the track or drive gear.

Also, I do not believe that the rubber tire system is really any more risky, assuming regular maintenance. Instead of a machined track, you could use some kind of asphalt equivalent. (It can not be real asphalt however, as asphalt will want to flow under the influence of gravity.)

There may however be a draw back to the tire system. The elevator shaft would then have to contain the outward force of the passing car through the building's infrastructure, as the car will want to squeeze outward.

Unfortunately, truly deciding between the two will require the skills of a full mechanical & structural engineer. Its good you mentioned it though.

[tridim]

2. I think you've caught Segway fever

The sole purpose of an elevator is to help us avoid multiple flights of stairs. Why would we need to go any direction but up and down? It's easy (and healthy) to walk. Those that have medical problems can simply park their electric wheelchair in the elevator, ride up, and then motor off to their office.

I'm not knocking your ideas, but the Segway fiasco has solidified my practicality of late. Simply stated, there's no point in solving a problem that doesn't exist.

[Code_Name_D]

5. I do not agree with this.

You make a good point that as Americans, we tend to want to find easy ways out. But your assertion has two problems with it. First, you may mock a man for being to lasy to clime 10 flights of stares. But would you be so swift to mock a man reluctant to clime 50 flights? 100 flgihts, or 10,000 flights? Climbing stares is actually not the same things as crossing a parking lot. It requires a lot more energy. It also involves a lot more risk as there is always the chance of taking a spill down a flight of stares, a prospect that could vary easily be fatal. The risk of this is why schools and universities only use single floor plans. Making sprawling complexes when building up would actually be cheaper.

The second point is the problem presented by the handy capped. They don't even have the option of ascending or descending even a small flight of stares. But even where there are elevators for them to use, they must still traverse the distance from the elevator to the bus or subway stop.

As for trying to fill a need that doesn’t exist. That may be so. However, another such project that I have been tinkering with is a new type of low income housing. I find that the only way to succeed with such project housing is to connect the residences to public transportation hubs as well as to build sufficient economic mass to attract business to serve the poor, thus providing jobs and resources. To achieve such mass, one has to be able to horizontally traverse the complex with similar ease of an elevator, also given that the poor consist of an unusually large percentage of the handicapped. Indeed, most persons who are on welfare, are persons who can work, but only have no means to get to and from work. But even that aside, nothing says that I can not speculate.

[tsipple]

4. We Do Have "Turbo Lifts"

They're called pneumatic tube systems. The type that are still used by banks in their drive-through lanes. I've been to one big manufacturing company that still uses theirs, built in the 1920s, to send parts and internal mail around their complex. It still works great.

No real reason why they can't be used for people if scaled up, perhaps with some maglev technology to make the ride smoother.

But it's simple economics why such things haven't been built for people. With horizonal people movers, elevators, and escalators you pretty much have all the bases covered for a lot less money (and not much less convenience).

Frankly I think there ought to be fewer of these things. Too many of us are overweight anyway. One way I try to get my exercise is to take the stairs and walk alongside the people movers at every possible opportunity. I also try to walk (or bicycle) lots of places instead of pulling out the car.

I'd also prefer fewer sprawling building complexes, occupying lots of horizontal space. Vertical is arguably more environmentally friendly. (Density is a good thing, when you get right down to it.)

[alfredo]

6. It is still fun to think about such things.

Mine would be quad tracks vertical, acting like a rack and pinion. They will be retractable. For horizontal movement tracks , rubber wheel will extend to meet the track. the vertical tracks will retract, awaiting the next vertical movement.

[Code_Name_D]

9. Pneumatic tubes have two problems.

Pneumatic tubes have two problems. First, unless it is built with an internal chamber that can rotate, the car will not be able to traverse the horizontal to vertical without typing the passengers and cargo. Secondly, when scaled up, and when dealing with taller buildings, you have to build up pressure to lift the car. Normal tubes work by injecting or extracting air from one end or the other. The opposite end however remains open to room pressure. But to lift a car up, lower hatches would all have to be sealed and pressurized. Pressurization also means that you can no longer use fans to move the air, but compressors. And the larger the system, the more air you would need to move the car. I do not believe pneumatic technology would be practical for this application.

[AndyTiedye]

7. The "Inclinators" at the Luxor in Las Vegas go Diagonally

up each corner of the pyramid.

[LibLabUK]

8. Hmmm

A major problem with your plan is space. People who build tall buildings want value for money and that means that they want the most space for as little cash as possible.

Currently the building of extremely tall buildings is limited by lifts (elevators). As the building gets taller you need to devote more and more space to the lifts that will get people up there.

What you are suggesting is giving over even more space, a valuable commodity, to solving a problem that doesn't exist.

So maybe it isn't that no one has worked it out before, it's because it really isn't worth doing.