Hyperloop CrowdStorm

of 76 /76
HYPERLOOP TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGIES CROWDSTORM DOCUMENTATION OFFICIAL

Embed Size (px)

description

Hyperloop concept document created by Hyperloop TransportationTechnologies. Published December 2014

Transcript of Hyperloop CrowdStorm

  • HYPERLOOPT R A N S P O R TAT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S

    CROWDSTORM DOCUMENTATION

    O F F I C I A L

  • HYPERLOOPT R A N S P O R TAT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S

    THE FUTURE IS

    NOW

  • Weve put this document together to explain the process Hyperloop Transportation Technologies, Inc. is going to use in order to make the Hyperloop a reality. It will also show the progress and some of the key opinions and ideas that have been surfaced since the Hyperloop idea was announced. Finally, youll find some preliminary studies and concepts done in the interests of helping to answer some key safety and engineering questions.

    THE METHOD

    In todays economy, most entrepreneurs are trying to solve small-scale problems or improving on currently active technologies. This leaves many larger but no less pressing issues unresolved. The Hyperloop would not only have the potential revolutionize transportation,, it solves a major problem: over populated cities and highways. The ramifications of partially resolving that problem is staggering. The question that we ask ourselves: are the times of the Carnegies and Rockefellers over?

    Our answer is a resounding No! We as a company believe that dedicated people organized into companies can still succeed in amazing, massive undertakings. Of course we are aware that building the Hyperloop will require a significant investment. However, the most important ingredient to achieving amazing results is getting people involved who are committed and passionate about working to achieve results. With people resources in place, the financing of the project question becomes less daunting. In todays world its much easier to connect passionate, interested individuals to each other. At JumpStartFund, we truly believe that if we connect people who are willing to invest their time and knowledge in the Hyperloop project, we will make it a reality. Hyperloop Transportation Technologies (HTT) was founded with the specific intent to use crowd collaboration as an integral component of its business model, from the first day of inception to becoming a multi-billion dollar company. JumpStartFund believe that smarter companies will be built that way. The crowd has power, offering opinions and expertise that are difficult to come by easily unless harnessed through collaboration,. The crowdsourcing model has proven itself in a variety of contexts, and has shown that it can beat even the brightest scientists and supercomputers. Reliance on crowdsourcing, allows anyone who gives valuable input should receive value in return. By using JumpStartfunds (www.jumpstartfund.com) approach, 10% of HTTs future revenue will be divided among the participants and winners of the different tasks that will be completed (read more here www.jumpstartfund.com/howitworks).

    This approach borrows many aspects from open source models, and combines them with commercial enterprise. Thus, Hyperloop Transportation Technologies is a unique combination of a commercial company and open forum, in which virtually anyone with ideas and passion can participate and be part of potential future profits. If you can contribute something valuable, you can receive a part of the companys success in return. This open-ended, crowd-oriented approach has been Hyperloop Transportation Technologies approach from the very beginning, and will continue to be.

  • The Team Currently the core team consists of over a hundred amazing people who believe in the project enough to work without immediate compensation, some of them full time. They dedicate as much as forty or more hours a week and commit to a weekly minimum in exchange for stock options within the company. Most of them have full-time jobs and amazing backgrounds. Top talent has applied with education from top universities like Harvard, Stanford, MIT, Dartmouth, UCLA and many others. Many also have work experience in leading companies like Boeing, Airbus, NASA, Tesla, SpaceX, Salesforce, Yahoo, Cisco and many more.

    HYPERLOOPT R A N S P O R TAT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S

    HYPERLOOPW O R L D W I D E T E A M S

  • One of Hyperloop Transportation Technologies key partnerships is with UCLAs SUPRASTUDIO (for more info see http://www.aud.ucla.edu/programs/m_arch_ii_degree_1.html). They UCLAs SUPRASTUDIO will lead the design efforts in an extensive program with participants from all over the world, as well as with members of Hyperloop Transportation Technologies core team who are interested in specific areas such as capsule design, station logistics, and overall traveler experience.

    Progress

    The uniqueness of this crowd-oriented commercial project has brought some unique challenges to the forefront, including the legal ramifications of this brand new model. Despite the obstacles, however, we have attracted and developed a core team that will progress quickly and make sustainable impact. The community has discussed many issues and several people have contributed amazing value. We would like to use this document to present some of the findings that came from our treatment of the initial topics. This will include opinions and ideas that range from the most immediately applicable to those in the distant future.

    Why include the even the futuristic ideas? Its simple - we believe that at times, those are the ones that spark the most valuable outcomes. Overall, we are trying to solve the challenges with a completely new approach. One idea leads to the next, and with a project as new and gigantic as building the Hyperloop will be the only way were going to find the correct solutions is by keeping an open mind.

    Call to Action

    We believe that there are no technical challenges that cant be solved, and by using this unique approach we hope to resolve challenges faster and more efficiently than would otherwise be possible. Besides the technology aspect of the Hyperloop, we see enormous advantages on how the lives of millions of people would be positively influenced with the Hyperloop becoming reality.

    The most amazing thing in this process is that so many people, from all over the world and with amazing backgrounds, is coming together to make the Hyperloop happen. Its the first project of its kind in history, and people who share a common belief are doing it. The input of tens of thousands of people, including yours, will make this one of the best transport systems in the world.

    If youre interested in the Hyperloop, we would like you to join our team. Anyone whos interested in being part of the project is welcome to apply at: www.jumpstartfund.com/hyperloop/team

    If you are not quite ready to join the team, but still have an idea or an opinion youd like to share, let us know! We welcome input on an array of topics included in this document, whether in the form of new ideas, criticism, and general commentary, please submit them at: http://jumpstartfund.com/#!/p/hyperloop/file/crowdstorm-document

    Since the announcement of the Hyperloop concept in August 2013, the idea has anything but gone away. Hyperloop Transportation Technologies has done a lot of engineering research on the capsule, the tube, and the propulsion system. As much as we would love to have the Hyperloop built by the end of the year, there are still plenty of questions that remain unanswered. Thats why weve published this crowdstorming document. We want to brainstorm with you. Do you have ideas or answers to these questions? Maybe you have other questions? In any of these cases, please let us know!

  • HyperloopInitially the Hyperloop was presented as an alternative to the High-speed rail project from Los Angeles to San Francisco. As a refresher, the Hyperloop design uses a combination of low air pressure and magnetic acceleration to get people from LA to SF in just about 30 minutes, which is almost three times faster than flying, while producing its own electricity from solar power, with round-trip tickets projected to cost between $40-$60. If you want to know more about the details of this system, you can check out SpaceXs Hyperloop page (www.spacex.com/hyperloop), which includes a good first look at the original proposal, as well as Elon Musks original white paper.

    While it would of course be fantastic to have a Hyperloop between LA and SF as originally proposed, those arent the only two cities in the US and all over the world that would seriously benefit from the Hyperloop. Beyond the dramatic increase in speed and decrease in pollution, one of the key advantages the Hyperloop offers over existing designs for high-speed rail is the cost of construction and operations. Our goal is to keep the ticket price between LA and SF in the $20-$30 range. If this same overall price point were preserved for other city pairings, it could dramatically change the way people live and work in cities.

  • It quickly becomes apparent just how dramatically the Hyperloop could change transportation, road congestion and minimize the carbon footprint globally.. Even without naming any specific cities, its apparent that the Hyperloop would greatly increase the range of options available to those who want to continue working where they do, but dont wish to live in the same city, or who want to live further away without an unrealistic commute time; solving some of the major housing issues some metropolitan areas are struggling with. In reality, any cities connected by a Hyperloop would see a flourishing development comparable to the beginning of the 20th century with the arrival of widespread train connections. One reason for this is that right now, many people cannot readily afford air travel, and taking the time to drive long distances is often a luxury. With the Hyperloop, extremely fast, inexpensive intercity travel would be widely accessible. If both people and goods can move more quickly and comparatively cheaply, rapid growth is a logical outcome. As to the economics, we have confirmed that its absolutely feasible to build the entire line for an estimated $20-45 million per mile. For comparison, consider that other mass transit option being considered for routes between San Francisco and Los Angeles comes out to an estimated $200 million per mile.

    From the social and economic point of view, the Hyperloop is simply unbeatable. Before it can be built, there are some questions wed like your feedback on.

    As with all the points in this document, we hope to solicit feedback as well as input for these numbers.

    While the initial idea was truly fascinating, it left most of the details unexplored. Here is a sampling of some of the issues the community has helped us begin to address. Following this section youll find a technical details section. If youre here for the charts and graphs, thats where youll find them.

  • Progress Overview

    CAPSULE | AERODYNAMICS

    Several studies have been conducted, with the one from Ansys standing out most have shown that from a theoretical point of view it is feasible. Below is some of the information from the analysis conducted by Ansys:

    Assumptions:

    1. Capsule moving at 210 m/s, i.e. at 470 miles per hour

    2. Mass flow split assumed as: 50% sucked by fan, 50% goes around the capsule.

    3. Air sucked by the fan is then distributed at 40% from the tail and remaining to the air bearings.

    Preliminary results:

    1. A circular cross-section will lead to better aerodynamics.2. Exhaust of the air bearings will have to be controlled carefully to ensure proper capsule aerodynamics.3. Front opening needs to be circular like that of an aircraft jet engine for improved aerodynamics.4. End point of the tail needs to be lifted for improved capsule aerodynamics.

    HYPERLOOPT R A N S P O R TAT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S

  • Our team has elaborated further, refined those models assuming the initial parameters:

    Tube pressure = 100Pa Air density = 0.00116kg/m3 Capsule speed = 210m/s (470mph) initially for better accuracy, later up to 760 mph Mass flow is split 50-50 between compressor and outside capsule -Compressor mass flow distributed 40-60 to the tail outlet and air bearings, respectively

    And came to the following conclusion:

    The capsule should have a more circular cross section (axisymmetric shape).

  • The air flowing out of the air bearing strongly disturbs the airflow around the capsule, so if the air bearing solution is implemented, the air bearing skies need to be designed as one part to reduce disturbance of flow around capsule.

    The initial tail design can be improved significantly for aerodynamics by lifting the tail.

  • THE TUBE-TO-CAPSULE CROSS-SECTION AREA RATIO IS ~1.52 (CURRENT DESIGN)

    Overall mainly the shape of the capsule tube-to-capsule determines the Kantrowitz limit issue area ratio should vary along the capsule length (not in the current design).

    Mach number, Max. Mach =1.979

    ZONES WITH MACH NUMBER, HIGHER THAN ONE ARE RED

  • VELOCITY

    CROSS SECTION VELOCITY VECTORS

  • VELOCITY AT COMPRESSOR INLET

    HYPERLOOPT R A N S P O R TAT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S

  • Questions and Next steps:

    1. Can we tune the capsule geometry for better aerodynamics - not a constant cross section?

    2. Should it be axisymmetric (revolution object)?

    3. How will it change with different back tail design (lifting tail)?

    DISCUSSIONJ O I N T H E

    W W W . J U M P S T A R T F U N D . C O M

  • CAPSULE ASSEMBLY

    The initial design of the capsule was in one piece and with nice looking wing doors. We believe the design is important for the passenger. It makes him feel comfortable and safe. When thinking of boarding it comes clear that due to the barrow space boarding can only be done laterally.

  • But the low pressure inside the tube and the velocity requires for a very solid capsule, which would require very large doors and creates design challenges to keep the capsule structural stable.

    Here a concept that uses an independent shell and loads them sideways.

    A boarding from the back would be beneficial, as it would allow having a very stable capsule and only one heavy door. But that seems impossible to do due to the space restrictions and in addition if possible would delay boarding times.The solution is to create a capsule assembly, where the outer shell, which travels inside the tube and incorporates the compressor as well as all necessary technology is independent from the seating module, Passengers can still board laterally and will than be moved inside the outer shell ready for departure once seated.

    The capsule could be kept separate from the outer shell, through magnetic levitation and balance movement to provide a more comfortable ride.

    The space in between the outer shell and the seating module could be in a vacuum to create isolation from sound as well as high temperatures.

  • Capsule Types In order to optimize the routes, we defined 3

    types of capsule arrangements.

    Economy classHere the seating arrangement is dense to optimize performance

    Business Class The business class arrangement allows for more comfort and interaction during the ride. The capacity is lower due to the use of some of the space for amenities.

    FreightThe freight module fits standard airfreight shipping containers for easy handling.

  • CAPSULE INTERIOR

    Claustrophobia was one of our main concerns while designing the interior. People will find it difficult to accept a new mode of transport that makes them feel cramped and trapped.

    How do you create a sense of openness inside a capsule with no windows?

    We are studying several solutions. One is to create a window like feeling, where we imitate the light spectrum outside of the capsule. It would vary by the time of day and therefore not feel closed. We believe it would improve the overall passenger experience.

    LIGHT AND ILLUMINATIONColor Emotion and Illumination System

    DEPARTURE

    ARRIVAL

    DECELERATION

    ACCELERATION

    CRUISE

    healthy

    Flashlight10s Alarm

    Flashlight10s Alarm

    30s Linear LightIllumination

    Linear LightIllumination

    30s Linear LightIllumination

    VisualizationScreen

    Spot LightPersonal Space

    EntertainmentSystem

    Emergency

    White LightIllumination

    FluorescentIndicator

    The Regents of the University of California, Los Angeles

    HYPERLOOPT R A N S P O R TAT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S

  • Other solutions that are being analyzed are concepts where the wall and ceiling of the capsule would be lined with OLED television screens that work together to project the image of the outside of the capsule or stock scenery.

    An emergency bathroom could be available in the business class capsule, this bathroom would be meant only for emergencies as we can assume a fasten seat belt sign on for the entire trip. Any cabin feature / functionality that has passengers leaving their seats or unbuckling their seat belts / harness is likely to be problematic. The accelerations in normal operation are going to be of the order of +/- 0.5g axially and 1g or more under emergency stopping situations. The emergency exit would be through the back of the capsule. The business class will have all of the necessary amenities.

    PASSENGER INTERFACE OF HYPERLOOP CAPSULETo Realize A Human-oriented Passenger Interface

    DUE TO THE SITA PASSENGER SELF-SERVICE SURVEY 2012

    WHAT DO PASSENGERS WANT ?

    FEATURES OF INTERFACE FEATURES OF INTERFACE

    of passengers aged between 18-24 use social media.

    80%

    of passengers are stressed due to concerns over loss of time.

    44%

    of passengers find security the most stressful part of the passenger journey.

    31%

    In todays mobile connected world, passengers demand the same comforts in the Hyperloop as they do at home or the office.

    Virtual Office Entertainment

    Environment Security

    Passengers are presented with a variety of choices in Hyperloop Capsule. From controlling lighting and temperature to experienc ingadvanced information, entertainment and management functionalities, you will decide what happens in your journey and have a fulfilled time and a wonderful experience.

    1. Wide variety of entertainment and information choices: DVD, CD MP3, TV and Radio2. Full digital Audio and Video distribution3. Vertual office features4. Flexible configuration5. Interactive moving map6. Touchscreen control of all system capabilities

    INTERFACE OF HYPERLOOP CAPSULETo Realize A Human-oriented Passenger Interface

    2

    Moving Map

    iPad Arm Mount Dock

    Calling, Seatcontrol panel

    Blu-ray and DVD Player

    HD Widescreen LCD

    headsets, HDMI and USB devices, Ethernet sources and bluetooth devices.

    HD Galley Control Panel, easy access to all cabin functions

    Scroll Wheel and table light

    MembraneSwitch Panels, reading/tablelight, thermal control,

    table light and overhead light

    Book,Magazine,bag, trash space

    Folding boardfor meal

    Space for working

    The Regents of the University of California, Los Angeles

  • Questions and Next Steps:1. Bathrooms:

    One belief is that with a 40 min trip time it is not absolutely necessary to have restrooms on board.

    Another is that perhaps capsules could be designed differently depending on how long the trip will be. No bathrooms for shorter trips (

  • SEATING ARRANGEMENTS

    Human emotion is always important while making a design, it could be influenced by so many factors like dimension, environment, user experience, etc. It is widely accepted that different spaces could generate specific feelings. Here we are going to research the influence of space and distance to human emotion. As we have already studied the relationship between human and space in dimension aspect, it would be possible for us to view a single person as a bubble and combine several bubbles in different patterns to find out the most appropriate function for different area.

    HOVERING AND PROPULSION

    We have extensively discussed several options and believe an Air Suspension System could be the best solution, as it would be the lowest cost alternative. In addition, we are evaluating several existing technologies and believe air and magnetic levitation are the most feasible solutions, perhaps using wheels.

  • The white paper suggests a propulsion system based on advanced linear induction motor system developed to accelerate/decelerate the capsule and intermittently maintain speed at regular tube intervals not to exceed a maximum of 1g. A rotor (capsule) and stator (tube) system needs to be designed with an interface method & control such that the capsule enters, it stays within and exits the gap safely and precisely.

    The community has discussed the topic and several contributors even outside the core team have sent us their ideas.

    Discussions and Ideas

    AIR

    Suspending the capsule within the tube will be a significant technical challenge due to transonic cruising velocities. The airflow will create a disturbance and controlling the capsule during the ride as well as being able to connect safely to the linear motors at high speed, seem to be the biggest challenges.

    Proposed combined air suspension and section / plan of intercooling utilizing tube ambient as means of cooling.

  • Magnetic Levitation Many newer technologies, seem to be a fit for the system. It would be possible to use it for levitation as well as propulsion. The capsule could be controlled throughout the way. But even a hybrid might be a solution.

    Wheels The proposed wheel for Hyperloop, it is 1,200 mm (4ft) diameter, and has a curved surface. Like ball bearings in a race, the surface radius is slightly smaller than that of the tube.

    Hyperloop runs in a cylindrical tube, which is the perfect track because it has a large surface area and cannot derail. Larger and wider wheels can be used and the system is inherently stable with the capsule adopting the ideal bank angle to suit the speed.

    Centrifugal force is inversely proportional to the diameter; and bigger wheels have less stress. At 1200mm diameter and 1200km/h, the rotational stresses are within safe limits for forged steel or aluminum (Hoop stress 433 or 150 mPa). Compared to typical railway wheels, Hyperloops are larger diameter, wider and have 1/5th of the surface contact stress.

    The capsule requires acceleration and regenerative braking of 0.5g. All 4 wheels would be motor-driven. The friction coefficient (rail adhesion) of steel on steel is 0.35 - 0.5, so we may need to angle the wheels 45 degrees from vertical, so the wedging effect would allow a minimum 0.5g of grip. Other surface materials would perform better.

    See the section on tube construction: Steering is required to give the passengers a smooth ride. The bearings would need to be supplied with cool oil.

    The Kantrowitz problem The Kantrowitz problem needs to be solved by

    compression of the air, in order to get the required mass flow over the pod without exceeding

    the speed of sound. The wheel solution compresses the air in front of the pod

    using the thrust of the wheels; Alpha uses internal compression.

  • Questions and Next Steps:

    1. What other system might exist?

    2. Are there any existing working systems similar to the Air skis?

    3. Are their any magnetic levitation technologies, that exist that dont impact to much on the construction cost?

    DISCUSSIONJ O I N T H E

    W W W . J U M P S T A R T F U N D . C O M

  • Compressor

    The compressor removes the air in front of the capsule and reduces the Kantrowitz limit. Many commercial compressors exist that should fit the requirements.

    At this time we have to define the exact requirements to select the first one.

    STEAM VERSUS AIR

    An alternative approach was proposed utilizing water vapor versus air. Utilizing the ambient conditions of the tube as heat exchangers for inter compression cooling.

  • Questions and Next Steps

    1. If air skis are being used what are the requirements for the compressor?

    2. If there are no air skis being used what are the requirements?

    3. Which compressors exists that are in the range of this application?

    DISCUSSIONJ O I N T H E

    W W W . J U M P S T A R T F U N D . C O M

  • Tube Material Cost, stability, and ease of manufacturing are the main factors we consider when looking at alternative materials. Most of the time it comes back to the cost. A more stable tube needs less support. The pylons are a big cost factor and if we can use less, we can reduce the construction cost dramatically.

    Being able to manufacture the tube with ease on location would be great and accelerate production therefore reduce cost as well.

    Steel Option There are several options when looking at steel. We are researching the best fit to keep the cost minimal. One of the issues with a tube like that is the fact that it will deform under its own weight. This can be solved by producing a tube that has an oval shape and than becomes round under its own weight. It would make sense to manufacture the tubes in proximity to the building site, with an eventual movable production site could be a solution.

    Corrugated option The most economical way to make a vacuum tube is corrugated steel, possibly spiral-wound like used for culverts using much thinner steel. The tube is less rigid, expansion joints are not required, and it could be formed to match the curves.

    But the accuracy would be poor, so the lower half needs to be faired with precision with a concrete- like filler. Then a liner would be required for the running surface, and a light liner above to help airflow.

    Fiber Glass Fiberglass molded sections would work well, giving excellent accuracy using a computer-adjusted internal mold for the curved sections. The material cost is much higher than steel, offset by reduced labor cost, as the process could be automated. It would not need expansion joints. The lower half would need to be lined.

    A tra jectory for the tube would be designed to give the best passenger comfort at high speed. It would be a complex blended curve, with gentle lead-ins for the tight turns and elevation changes. The accuracy of the tube surface relative to the tra jectory would affect the g-forces and vibration of the capsule even a few mm would cause problems.

    Air bearing skis and wheels have the same challenges with smooth running in the tube. The skis have a clearance of about 1mm, so the tube surface must be better than that.

  • An interesting idea regarding the fiberglass solution is the concept presented by AutoCAD. There are machines that can churn out limited qualities of the braided carbon fiber. Brandt envisions building a supersize version and mounting it onto a rig loaded with reels of carbon fiber so it could roll along the Hyperloops route. Working at a rate of 1 meter per minute, this factory on wheels could weave a Hyperloop tube from Los Angeles to San Francisco in less than two years, and, so says AutoCAD, require fewer support pylons.

    Tube Orientation

    Currently exploring different solutions.

    The basic premise is to stack the tubes rather than arranging them side-by-side. This will achieve a greater structural depth, which has direct positive impact on the spanning capacity of the tube assembly. I am speculating that it may be very efficient at spans approaching 150 feet or so based on conventional truck length to height ratios, which would cut the number of pylons by at least half. There are some thoughts about the pylon construction in those sketches the primary question being whether the pylon is itself a node to which the tubes are mounted or is it simply a support to which the tube is attached.

    Tube ideally consists of a single ovoid steel shell with lightweight super strong, super smooth liner. You would want a somewhat sloppy fit to enable the liner preferably carbon fiber composite, to smooth out the radii without needing to bend the steel shell (difficult), which at a radius of a mile or so is no issue. It might then make sense on tighter radii to switch to a rectangular steel tube with tighter radii within. The ease with which a carbon fiber or other composite can be configured to a radius makes it the obvious choice for a liner, which could then be suspended within the steel tube on shock absorbent of at least compliant mounts.

  • Tube orientationconcepts

    HYPERLOOPT R A N S P O R TAT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S

  • Questions and Next Steps:

    1. What material and method of tube construction presents the ideal combination of safety, cost, and overall function?

    2. How will tube construction allow for emergencies, such as rapid depressurization or large scale leaks, capsule malfunction, or natural disasters such as earthquakes?

    3. How much arching of the tube is allowed with the different solutions?4. Is carbon a viable option, as it will cost more than a steel pipe and

    concrete pylon together?5. How will the static created by carbon fiber affect the capsule electronics?6. Can the durability of Kevlar be used as it has better wear and abrasion

    resistance compared to carbon?7. Would the carbon fiber weave machine mix and apply the 2-part

    epoxy and create an inner mold for it to form around to maintain its shape and rigidity at a meter per minute? Most epoxies fully cure within hours and cold night temperatures delay and prevent a full cure causing inconsistency and weakness.

    8. Would it make sense to implement a carbon sandwich (foam or nomex) to increase strength and reduce cost?

    9. Does the tube need to be in conformity of any special code requirements? (e.g., ASME)

    10. Do we need emergency exits and structures?11. Can the tube be anchored end to end at stations and float entire length?12. Will the tube need interior coating?

    DISCUSSIONJ O I N T H E

    W W W . J U M P S T A R T F U N D . C O M

  • Pylons

    The pylon design also involves cost, safety, and strength. Any project this size will also incur a large real estate acquisition cost. To decrease our footprint we are looking to reduce our number of pylons, increase our span between them, all while exceeding safety codes and regulations.

    We have factored in the weights for multiple capsules and a double stacked tube spanning up to 200 ft. We are taking inspiration on up to date pylon designs used in top-heavy concrete highways. The pylons have to factor in compressive loads as well as wind and earthquake shear.

    Ultimately, we can account for all these stresses with a large safety margin by using more than the calculated vertical rebar, using post tensioned bars, fiber reinforced concrete, and horizontal hoop reinforcement to account for any shear forces.

    To ensure maximum safety there will be periodic tests and monitoring for uniformity and consistency regarding concrete mix ratio and curing temperatures.

    Correct ballast will also be needed for the varying terrains and soils we will have to encounter and test for. Special attention needs to be given to liquefaction zones around earthquake faults. Dampening and base isolation systems commonly found in bridges and buildings can be utilized to reduce and eliminate damage to the structure as a whole.

  • There will be a fine line between bracing for movement or simply isolating the structure and the moving ground.

    A concept for a modular pylon design

    HYPERLOOPT R A N S P O R TAT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S

  • Questions and Next Steps:

    1. What vertical pylon shape is optimal for our situation and load? (H beam, Y Beam, Pyramid)

    2. What horizontal pylon shape is optimal for our situation and load? (Square, Round, Octagon)

    3. What is the optimum concrete ratio available that allows for strength without being brittle?

    4. How deep and wide shall the ballast be?5. How will base isolation movement affect the tube alignment?6. How can we monitor in real time tube and pylon alignment?7. Will there be an emergency shutoff or slowdown if misalignment

    is detected?8. How will the pylon move at different pylon heights and how

    much displacement will the tube experience?9. How can we optimize pillar anchoring with seismic requirements

    / structural and tube lateral vertical displacement allowance?10. Extended structural analysis to optimize anchoring at the

    ground and end points?11. Preliminary tube design integrating intermittent station

    pumping system and propulsion?- Station to tube interface expansion joint design.- Simulation of tube lateral and axial tolerance for capsule

    ride ability suspension design.12. Alternate or custom construction techniques to optimize costs?

    DISCUSSIONJ O I N T H E

    W W W . J U M P S T A R T F U N D . C O M

  • Safety

    SAFETY AND RELIABILITY Safety is one of our major concerns. We are trying to identify all possible problems and actions to be taken. What should we do if someone gets sick, continue or stop? In attachment S, you can see the FMEA document in progress, outlining the potential hazard and the actions to take.

    We need to ask us things like:

    1. What will happen in the event of the depressurization of a Hyperloop capsule? Pressure is so low (100 Pascal) that under the point of view of human physiology the conditions are closer to space than to the ones at commercial airplanes. At 100 Pascal none of the emergency measures commonly used even by military pilots (except the partial pressure suit of course), are enough to avoid severe hypoxia and traumas related to the decompression. Luckily we are not in space but on earth and believe we can find systems to compensate the pressure fast enough.

    2. What happens if a capsule is stranded in the tube? Where will the emergency exits be?

    A possible method to make an emergency brake procedure in a fast and reliable way might be to use the Kantrowitz effect. If air from the outside is allowed to come into the tube and equalize the pressure with the exterior, the capsule will suddenly have to go through and push a lot of air. At 300m/s the capsule will start compressing the air in front of it, working as a syringe head. If the pressure is allowed to rise above the sea level (for example closing some of the valves that initially opened to let the air in) the deceleration could possibly be more powerful. If the capsules area is not wide enough compared to the tubes area, some spoilers could be deployed to help block the air in front of it.

    Separating sections of the tube could be the way to avoid having to pump out the air from the whole system once the service has to be restarted. Big valves that close the whole tube could separate one section from the next one. This has the advantage that could also help build up the pressure in front a capsule thats braking while maintain the low pressure behind, helping this way to stop the capsule in less time, just by opening the valves in front of it and letting the ones behind closed.

    Instead of using a big sliding door or a similar kind of solid valve, a high-pressure inflatable plug could be used. It could be a textile closed shaped as a cylinder (imagine a inflatable Coke can, with the same diameter of the tube) that could be stored in a relatively small pack (similar to the ones that contain airplane slides or survival rafts) at the side or upper part of the tube, maybe forming a package with the recompression valves.

    This repressurization packs would be installed every 10 km or so in the faster parts of the system (the capsules will be separated by 2 min, at their top speed that means 20 km), and closer at parts were the capsules go slower.

  • Questions and Next Steps:

    1. How fast can capsule decelerate for emergency stop? Allowing damage, and without damaging system?

    2. What is the capsule behavior if it hits higher or even normal density air while traveling at 700 MPH? Can it be designed to survive that and protect the passengers

    3. If there is a large tube breach, will the air be filling the tube at a high velocity? Will the additional speed and turbulence increase the danger to the capsule?

    4. How fast will the capsule decelerate if it encounters high-density air?

    5. Could the bladders deploy correctly with high-speed air flowing by?

    6. How fast will the capsule decelerate if the compressor is turned off? Reversed?

    7. How fast will the capsule decelerate if a wing is used to block the gap around the capsule?

    8. Will we have good data access to allow remote medical assistance via video consult?

    9. How long will the system continue to run if we lose power in the area? Need to at least finish trip for all in progress capsules. If possible nice to continue for 8 hours to allow people to get home.

    10. How fast can we deploy bladders and fill a section of the tube if needed to provide air for passengers?

    11. How much tunnel misalignment is allowed?

    12. Will oxygen masks work in a major capsule breach?

    13. Could we provide fire suppression the capsule?

    14. What is the quake resilience of pylons, supports, etc.? VS quake magnitude

    15. Could people walk in tube if capsule is unable to move to exit?

    DISCUSSIONJ O I N T H E

    W W W . J U M P S T A R T F U N D . C O M

  • Station

    STATION TYPES

    The time passengers will spend inside the station affect the design a lot. Time can decide the size of station, the amenities in the station and the number of passengers inside the situation.

    So, first of all we need to decide how long we want the passengers to stay inside the station. If we want them pass the station as soon as possible, we can design it like a subway station. So our station will be very efficient. To further improve the efficiency we could provide some special services such as Hyperloop Shuttle to take passengers from their own home then directly to the gate.

    The time inside the boarding area should be reduced to the minimum.

  • LUGGAGE HANDLING

    HYPERLOOPT R A N S P O R TAT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S

  • The time that capsule is in the boarding area needs to be precise to guarantee a constant workload.

    Handling modes for the capsule

    There are several different ways to turn an arrived capsule over in order to leave.A U-turn, would lets the capsule turn while the approach of a turntable rotates on it self.Another concept could be to switch the front of the capsule from one end to the other or let the capsule be able to move in both directions.

  • AIRLOCK

    The tube has a lower pressure than the station. So in order to maintain the pressure, we need to employ airlocks. In this case a capsule would enter the first area and once the airlock connected with the tube closed we can move forward into the next area which closes behind and regulates the pressure..

    FIRST AND LAST MILE

    We believe its important to give the passenger a great experience throughout. What could might a trip time of 30 min do, if it takes over an hour to get to the station and the stress and traffic ruined your day.

    We looked into several options to make it easy to get to and from a station.

  • By foot, car sharing or with other transit solutions the local hyperloop stations could be easily reached. Local Hyperloops travel at lower speed, and can be integrated easily into the city landscape.

    Different stations can be connected by a circular Hyperloop

  • Route

    METHODOLOGY

    Finding optimal routes for the Hyperloop across the USA is a two-step process:

    SELECTING OPTIMAL CITY PAIRS

    We evaluated city pairs by the likelihood of the acceptance of a Hyperloop proposal, which boiled down to 7 selection variables. The selection variables have been ordered by level of importance below (most important first):

    1. Existing air travel demand between city pair (significant intercity air travel demonstrates likelihood for high HL ridership)

    2. Population of cities in pair (larger population centers lead to increased HL ridership)3. Terrain between city pair (flatter and straighter routes reduce cost and have the

    potential for faster speeds with smoother vertical and horizontal curves)4. % Of route distance in urbanized area (Urban construction increases cost and limits

    potential speed)5. Distance between city pair (longer distances prove effective for the HL as standard

    ground transportation becomes increasingly cost ineffective with distance, but air transportation does set an upper limit to the HLs effective distance as HL construction costs outweigh the benefits of time savings)

    6. Air travel hub (air travel hubs provide substantial transportation network extension possibilities for the HL)

    7. Recent growth rates of city pair (faster city growth leads to congested existing transportation as well as increased future demand for alternative transportation)

    SELECTING OPTIMAL ROUTES

    Once the optimal city pairs were established, we had to develop a systematic way to, given a city pair, select an optimal connecting route. We settled on 3 variables with which to evaluate routes:

    1. Cost 2. Travel time 3. Comfort - Comfort was equated to the radial acceleration along the route, with 0.5 gs

    as the accepted limit, as per the Hyperloop Alpha document.

    We have developed two optimization algorithms (along with complementary proprietary software) in order to find the best route.

  • ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

    In the course of research a baseline for the Carbon Footprint was established as a comparative between routes:

    Hyperloop Environmental Analysis Matrix

    Base assumptions:

    Hyperloop

    Headway between Capsules (Peak Hr.) 0.50 Minutes

    Peak Hour compared to Daily 10%

    Passengers per Capsule 28

    Pass per Peak Hour 3,360

    Pass per Year 12,000,000

    Use from Hyperloop Alpha 7,000,000 Passengers/DayCO2 per passenger mile (Source: http://www.buses.org/files/2008ABAFoundationComparativeFuelCO2.pdf & http://www.epa.gov/climateleadership/documents/resources/commute_travel_product.pdf)

    Car; 1 person 378 Grams CO2/ pass/mile

    Car; 2 people 189 Grams CO2/ pass/mile

    Diesel Train 186 Grams CO2/ pass/mile

    Domestic Jet- Long Haul (>700 miles) 185 Grams CO2/ pass/mile

    Domestic Jet- Medium Haul (>300 &

  • THE OPTIMAL ROUTES

    We identified several routes as impactful. In doubtful a network of Hyperloops would connect America in a new way.

    After looking at the criteria mentioned above, we conclude that the two major factors that influence the users of the routes between two cities are population and ridership.

    The Regents of the University of California, Los Angeles

    We combine them with other factors to get the final grades for the cities. The top ten cities are chosen as the first stations of Hyperloop, and the next ten cities are the phase two of the Hyperloop construction. Eventually the network will extend to other smaller cities.

  • The Regents of the University of California, Los Angeles

    1. Los Angeles to Las Vegas (Feasibility Score: 36, Travel time: 26.1 minutes):

    We studied the domestic tourism. As you can see the maximum percentage of visitors to Vegas are from L.A.

    Looking at the current networks between L.A and Vegas, there are no existing passenger rails between the two cities.

    The freight railroad is extensive and is owned by union pacific which has stations in both cities.

  • The Regents of the University of California, Los Angeles

    Looking at the data of tourism specifically from southern California to Vegas, we see that the primary means of transport is the car which is 96%.

    Since the late 1980s the concept of high-speed travel across the high desert between Southern California and Las Vegas has been a vision of many entrepreneurs, urban planners and enthusiasts alike. The Hyperloop offers the opportunity to business travelers and weekend tourists to breach this expanse in less than 30 min while maintaining the excitement and expectation of an exciting, short-term adventure.

  • The Las Vegas Airport is one of the busiest in the U.S.; Hyperloop can serve as a connector for arriving travelers, Southern California, with its semi-conservative business environment, is well populated by capable consumers ready to spend ample funds in a loose environment like Las Vegas with the safety of returning to the safety of their suburban lifestyle at the end of such a journey. Likewise, the residents of Las Vegas, while surrounded by entertainment and a viable night-life, can now access the relaxed and low-key Beach Cities communities of Southern California, well-known amusement theme parks, and year-round outdoor sports culture in less time than a high-speed flight. While affordable, the entire propulsion system for the Hyperloop has a nearly Zero Carbon Footprint. Furthermore, traversing the expanse between Orange, San Bernardino and Clark Counties with their pro-business environments will coincide well with these regions desire to create local, well-paying jobs for their constituents. Next, the Carbon-displacement posed by the Hyperloop promises to make it a favored alternative form of travel to planes, trains and automobiles which are traveling the high deserts along the 60 and 10 Highways now.

    Here, we place the route skeleton so as to force the path to go around Red Rock National Conservation Area right before hitting Vegas, to save us the permit hassle:

    Travel time, Comfort, and Safety: Despite avoiding the national park at the end, the accelerations stayed within 0.15gs, with breathing room to the 0.5g limit:

  • Section San Bernardino to Las Vegas (Feasibility Score: 10, Travel time: 15.3 minutes): Here, we place the route skeleton so as to force the path to go around Red Rock National Conservation Area right before hitting Vegas, to save us the permit hassle.

    Travel time, Comfort, and Safety: Despite avoiding the national park at the end, the accelerations stayed within 0.15gs, with breathing room to the 0.5g limit:

    Section San Bernardino to SB Metro link (Feasibility Score: 10, Travel time: 154 seconds)

  • Here, we followed the highway, since the surroundings were dense and heavily urbanized:

    Travel time, Comfort, and Safety: Because of the tighter geometry at this small scale, jerky motions seemed to dominate, and so, despite the radial accelerations being under 0.5gs, the jerk reached over 5-6m/s^3, which, while safe, could induce vomiting. So while the trip took a blistering 154 seconds, the speeds will have to be reduced to bring jerk to comfortable levels:

    Anaheim to San Bernardino (Feasibility Score: 10, Travel time: 10.8 minutes)Once again, we stuck to the highway.

    HYPERLOOPT R A N S P O R TAT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S

  • TRAVEL TIME, COMFORT, AND SAFETY:

    Despite the small scale, the jerky motions were almost 10x less than those in the SB path, and so this trip is a definite win in the comfort department. As for safety, the radial accelerations were under 0.5gs with some breathing room. As for time, the curves forced by the urban areas brought the travel time up to 10.8 minutes.

    2. San Francisco to LA (Feasibility Score: 41, Travel time: 34 minutes)

    Imagine a business traveler leaving in the morning in Los Angeles to close a business deal face-to-face with his counterpart in the City-by-the-Bay and be home for dinner with his partner that same night? Imagine a Bay Area Tourist who wants to visit a Southern California amusement park with his family and still be home that night? Daily (home the same day) Wine Country tours for Los Angelinos anyone? How about Northern Californians hitting the surf of the Southern California Beach Cities and still being home that night? With a travel time of 35 minutes its easy to imagine the how many people would travel between the 2 cities. Hyperloop connections might offer a solution to the housing problems faced by San Francisco.

    The propulsion system for the Hyperloop has a nearly Zero Carbon Footprint. Furthermore, traversing the expanse between these two urban centers will coincide well with these regions desire to create local, well-paying jobs for their constituents. Next, the Carbon-displacement posed by the Hyperloop promises to make it a favored alternative form of travel to planes, trains and automobiles which are traveling along the I-5 and 101 Freeways now.

    HYPERLOOPT R A N S P O R TAT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S

  • TEXAS TRIANGLE

    Overview: When evaluating city pairs, the Dallas - Houston - San Antonio triangle stood out to the route optimization team as one of the areas in the USA where the Hyperloop could make the biggest impact. In particular, feasibility predictors #1, 2, 3 and 4 were especially high:

    1. Existing air travel demand between city pair (significant intercity air travel demonstrates likelihood for high HL ridership).

    2. Population of cities in pair (larger population centers lead to increased HL ridership).3. Terrain between city pair (flatter and straighter routes reduce cost have the potential

    for faster speeds with smoother vertical and horizontal curves).4. % Of route distance in urbanized area (Urban construction increases cost and limits

    potential speed).

    The destination from Dallas/Fort Worth to Houston to Austin is well traveled as a trucking and courier route with some set conventional transportation times. For example, the major airlines have commuter air travel times from one hour plus while courier services between the three cities is guaranteed for the same day. By contrast, the Hyperloop will be able to transport the same payloads, people and packages alike, from 18.4 to 22.9 minutes,

  • less than half the time in the transport of people with no hassle from the Transportation Security Agency (TSA). Furthermore, larger package items on-board the Hyperloop will ensure a Carbon-Footprint reduction associated with tractor and trailer trucking as well as conventional air-flight travel. As for holiday travel, tourists traveling to the coast from Dallas/Fort Worth would have an array of attractions with which to choose. Houston is a well-established port city, with attractions like the Toyota Center, Astrodome, Six Flags AstroWorld, Space Center Houston and the Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center. Conversely, travelers from Houston and Austin in need of an international travel hub would be able to make their international connecting flight at Dallas/Fort Worth (DFW) International Airport in less-than-half the current time that it takes now. To be sure, DFW is so large that it has its own Zip Code (75261); the only airport in the world with this distinction. From a jobs creation perspective, while the Hyperloop might initially displace some initial shipping and courier services; it would the augment the well-established shipping and flight centers of Houston, Austin and Dallas/Fort Worth respectively. Overall, the reduction in Carbon-Footprint for travel with the triangle would be immense.

    Not counting waiting at stations, it takes, in this system, 28.6 minutes to get from San Antonio to Dallas (with stop at Austin) 22.9 minutes to get from Dallas to Houston 19.6 minutes to get from Houston to San Antonio

  • EAST COAST HYPERLOOP NETWORK The Northeast corridor is one of the busiest corporate travel routes in United Stated, connecting Washington D.C., Philadelphia, New York City and Boston. About 316,000 Bostonians traveling to New York, and about 1,000,000 New Yorkers traveling to Boston every year only for business are using the 200-mile distance between Boston and New York.

    There are even more travelers commuting between New York City and Washington D.C. making New York Penn Station and Washington D.C. Union Station the first and second busiest train stations in the country. Despite the fact that the connection between these four cities is well developed and various modes of transportations have been in use (frequent flights, Amtrak, and multiple bus lines), the travel time still falls within 2-5 hours, and the ticket price, with the exception of the buses, is still pretty steep. Not only do all these four cities are important business destinations, but they also hold cultural, educational and commercial significance in the region. With their long history the cities have much to offer from historical landmarks and historic trails to cultural events such as concerts and operas, art museums and galleries, as well sports and recreational events. Needless to say, connecting the cities with the Hyperloop - a more efficient, sustainable and faster means of transportation - would make a tremendous impact within the Northeast Corridor, improving their congestion, productivity, commerce as well as ease of traveling and comfort. A family can catch a Broadway show in Time Square and yet be back home in Boston for bedtime; or the businessman can have a breakfast meeting at the Capitol in DC and be back in New York for lunchtime.

    Overview: In the East Coast routes, the development was so dense that we changed to an algorithm that takes a route as input, and mathematically optimizes travel time under a 0.5 total G-force constraint.

  • 1. NEW YORK TO PHILADELPHIA, PA

    Today, time is our most valued asset; not only as individuals but also for the success of our business, the growth of our economy and most importantly for the destiny of our future. As a country that focuses on rapid growth and technological development, our daily routine to include effective time management in our travel requirements is a critical key to our success. Living and working in the North Eastern region of the Unites States is a prime example of how we value and place importance of our time.

    The North Eastern Corridor region is the fifth largest economy in the world, generating over 21 percent of the U.S. National GDP. Over 150 million tourists visit New York, Washington D.C, Boston, Philadelphia and Baltimore per year. The increasing demand for both business and non business travel between these states and the need to link suppliers, manufacturers, shippers and customers within the region has led to a realm of challenges faced by local transportation industries and mega commuters. Hyperloop transportation technologies has the potential to offer businesses and commuters of the Northeast Corridor a high speed transit system that would help reduce highway congestion, travel delays, travel time in each direction and overall travel cost. Hyperloop also would leave much less of a carbon footprint. The most common methods of transit currently used by daily commuters to travel from New York to Philadelphia are Air travel from LaGuardia or JFK, Amtrak rail lines, SEPTA, Bolt Bus and driving route I-95 S. Amtrak is currently the fastest way to travel (1 hr. 25 min) but too costly for many adding up to around $1395 per monthly pass or $54/ticket for one-way coach seats. A one-way flight from (LGA) to (PHL) can cost on average $332 with total travel time up to 3.5 hours. SEPTA train can become costly if not timed right using the SEPTA to NJ Transit connection and total travel time would equal 3 hours. Bus fare averages $10 per one-way trip but with less comfort and longer travel time and possible frequent stops. With average traffic conditions, it currently takes about 1 hour and 57 minutes to travel by car via I-95 South from New York to Philadelphia. For roughly the same amount of money spent on gasoline per trip $20 commuters can make it to their destination in just minutes in comparison by taking the Hyperloop.

    A Hyperloop capsule route from New York to Philadelphia would add great advantage to the transportation industry by disencumbering much of the load carried by other forms of transit, reducing congestion, it would be safer for the environment and it would provide a more affordable and convenient commute by cutting travel time

    2 New York to Boston (Feasibility Score: 10, Travel time: 19.5 minutes)

    While commuter-rail transportation along the Eastern Seaboard is well established, the prospect of truly high-speed ground transportation (near Mach 1) remains elusive. The Hyperloop offers the prospect for many Easterners of transcending their conventional transportation and engaging in authentic high-speed transport which makes the route from the Big Apple to Bean Town seem like a commute to the local grocery store. In fact, to be sure, an enterprising commuter could certainly shop for their groceries in one city while dining at home in the next - that is the benefit and value of the Hyperloop!

  • Here, we analyzed three possible routes (Red, Black, Green):

    3 New York to Boston (Feasibility Score: 10, Travel time: 19.5 minutes)

    While commuter-rail transportation along the Eastern Seaboard is well established, the prospect of truly high-speed ground transportation (near Mach 1) remains elusive. The Hyperloop offers the prospect for many Easterners of transcending their conventional transportation and engaging in authentic high-speed transport which makes the route from the Big Apple to Bean Town seem like a commute to the local grocery store. In fact, to be sure, an enterprising commuter could certainly shop for their groceries in one city while dining at home in the next - that is the benefit and value of the Hyperloop!

    Here, we analyzed three possible routes (Red, Black, Green):

  • 4 New York to Washington D.C. (Feasibility Score: 10, Travel time: 21 minutes)

    As already stated, commuter-rail transportation along the Eastern Seaboard is well established but the prospect of truly high-speed ground transportation (near Mach 1) remains elusive. In addition, the value of this transportation to the Nations Capital will make access to some of Washington D.C.s monuments along, The Mall accessible to students from urban centers who might not have this kind of opportunity otherwise.

  • HYPERLOOPT R A N S P O R TAT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S

  • Questions and next steps:1. What innovative solutions exist to make travel easier, boarding

    processes faster and everything a great experience?

    2. What solutions exist or have been done for the Airlocks at the station?

    DISCUSSIONJ O I N T H E

    W W W . J U M P S T A R T F U N D . C O M

  • Financial

    We are looking at 2 major things. Construction cost and the overall business model.Keeping a ticket price at a low level would allow us to change the way people use the Hyperloop. The ticket price reflects the construction cost that needs to be recovered so we want to keep it as low as possible.

    COST

    In our calculations we are filling in the blanks at the moment with assumptions from the white paper. Until we have our own calculations, we are very conservative and normally over-engineer.

    We started with calculating a cost per mile. The cost components include site work, landscaping, tunnels, pillars, tube, electrical, solar panel, HVAC, burdens and miscellany. We have omitted the negligible costs, like the capsule price per unit.

    Calculating, as an example, the initial proposed route between LA to SF, we arrived at a best-case scenario of $7.027 B and in the worst, $19.034 B.

    We know that values will change as we define details. Other areas can be reduced as well.

  • Questions and Next Steps:

    1. What are the costs for the open elements from the white paper?

    2. Can the distance between pylons be reduced, to reduce cost?

    DISCUSSIONJ O I N T H E

    W W W . J U M P S T A R T F U N D . C O M

  • Revenue

    For the revenue model we primarily are focusing on passenger transport. The revenue components include traffic times and ticket price anchor points. The potential for massive improvement in transportation represented by the Hyperloop has the potential to transform population distributions, commutes, housing markets, etc. in major populations. In order to reach its highest potential though -- a transportation system that allows people to split major parts of their daily lives across two major metropolitan areas -- it needs to be affordable as a daily mode of transportation.

    Economic theory would indicate that there is only one appropriate price -- the point at which supply equals demand. In our case this is where the number of people the loop can transport equals the number of people who are willing to pay the designated price. Though, in practice it is possible to employ multiple pricing strategies, like walk-up tickets vs. prepaid monthly passes.

    In short, there are two steps: determining the loops capacity at peak demand times, and estimating that demand at various prices.

    PEAK CAPACITY

    This part is fairly straightforward; the alpha document estimates shipping a new capsule every 30 seconds, with a capsule carrying up to 28 people.

    Capsule Capacity x Capsule Launch Rate = Transportation Capacity per Unit of TimeUsing the alpha document estimates, the loop should be able to transport 3360 passengers per hour.

    DEMAND

    This part is much trickier. The alpha document estimates travel as being 7.4 million passengers per year, using the currently available methods. However, with the Hyperloop providing such a substantial improvement over current transportation options we should expect the number of passengers to increase substantially. It should be noted that a minority of people might still choose to travel by plane/train/car even after travel via the loop is available. In addition to an initial increase, there could be an increase over time as people incorporate the availability of the Hyperloop into their plans, as a daily commute or otherwise. It may be possible to estimate this gradual increase by examining travel increases between cities where high-speed rail was installed.

    To start to estimate this demand, we can compare typical prices and costs of flights, train/bus rides, and driving to the number of travelers that choose that method.

  • COST LIMITATIONS

    To this point, we left out that a constraint on price is the need to turn a profit, or at minimum to break even. The alpha document suggest that if the loop transports 7.4 million passengers annually, it can repay its original projection of $6 billion over 20 years with ticket prices of $20+ operational costs.

    We are using the higher cost estimate of $16 billion, which implies a need for a higher minimum price per trip. However, this does not account for the assumed increase in travel between the two cities.

    If there is sufficient demand, we could lower ticket prices by increasing capsule capacity and/or launch rate, otherwise there will have to be a longer repayment plan, or higher prices.

    SUMMARY

    Passenger capacity per capsule, and capsule launch rate needs to be determined to calculate maximum number of trips provided at peak times, and per year.

    We might assume current demand to be under 7.4 million, but likely to rise once the project is completed.

    The lowest price we can charge is affected by our costs. The alpha document projects $20+ prices could cover $6 billion in costs over 20 years.

    However, our current projected cost is closer to $16 billion, implying a need for a higher ticket price, unless the loop transports significantly more than 7.4 million annually, or the timeline for repayment is extended. The demand for increased travel may exist with the shorter trip time provided by the loop, but the ability to match that demand is determined by transportation capacity (capsule capacity x launch rate).

    HYPERLOOPT R A N S P O R TAT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S

  • Questions and Next Steps:

    1. Should we research changes in total trips between cities where high-speed rails were installed?

    2. What additional revenue opportunities exist?3. Could there be a revenue opportunity by selling the power

    generated in excess?4. We have approx. 40 -45 min access to the attention of the

    passenger, how could we monetize?

    DISCUSSIONJ O I N T H E

    W W W . J U M P S T A R T F U N D . C O M

  • Financing

    A very important part of the project is financing.

    In general the company HTT is a research and development company that develops the know how to build Hyperloops in many cities around the world. The company is committed to using a community-based approach for crowdsourcing technical and financial inputs to the project.

    There are some exciting opportunities ahead for the marketplace in 2015 with respect to the JOBS Act once the rules go live. Title III, the crowdfunding regulations allows companies to raise up to $1 million dollars from the general public. But also Title IV Regulation A+ will allow us to raise up to $50 million, again from the general public online. There is investor limits based on individual net worth or annual income for each of these financing opportunities, which are de facto investor protections. The HTT team looks forward to using these methods because then the crowd has an opportunity to participate and be rewarded for all of the great work the contributors are making.

    We all know that the capital required to make this project a reality is large in sum and we may need to source some of the money using another JOBS Act provision, Title II 506c (general solicitation and advertising) which is akin to traditional financing methods allowing only accredited investors to take part even though we can raise the money on a crowdfunding platform. The benefit using this mechanism of financing is that there is no cap on the amount of money that HTT can raise and it allows a larger group of investors to get in at the ground level.

    However it is limited to only accredited investors and would leave out the general public, therefore serious consideration is also being given to filing as a public traded company to sell shares on the public market so that anybody has an opportunity to be a part of Hyperloops growth and the company gets the money needed to make this project a reality.

    HYPERLOOPT R A N S P O R TAT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S

  • Questions and next steps:1. Who would be the best strategic partner?

    2. Are there any other financial models and solutions that allow us to raise the funds and give anybody the chance to participate that believes in this venture?

    DISCUSSIONJ O I N T H E

    W W W . J U M P S T A R T F U N D . C O M

  • Prototype

    For sure one of the most challenging areas, The team is still uncertain about the best way to create a prototypes that allows to test all necessary components.

    We have started to build a mockup in order to test the capsule interior.

    It seems like several steps have to be taken in order to test the different areas

    1. A scaled version allow for the testing of the technical feasibility and probably the first step to take, taking care of hovering and propulsion outside of a tube to then move into the tube and the low-pressure environment. Here the tube capsule ratio, airflow could be tested as well as the compressor.

    2. A full scale Version of the capsule interior allows for getting an ambient feeling and the human factor.

    3. A full operating capsule that is capable of hovering and boarding people4. In order to test boarding procedures, it would seem like a great solution to test the station

    design at a high traffic area, like an amusement park.a. On a stretch of a couple of miles a full-scale Hyperloop could transport visitors. Costs

    for this version are high but reducing it to a couple of miles it would allow testing all components with a low risk, as it would be low speed. A draw back is that we would not be able to test speed.

    5. The best solution would be to create a full-scale version on a commercial route used for freight transport only. Here we could test out all components optimize speed, acceleration and get the most data for the final scope of transporting humans.

    a. In order to get up to speed and be able to slow down, we would need a minimum length of a little over 38 km (23.61 miles) but it wouldnt be able to be used by people, with a smooth ride we need approximately 120km (74.56 miles).

    b. As the cost for such a prototype are close to the final one, it would make only sense to place it in an area that has an actual need for a Hyperloop.

    Foreign countries interested in a green alternative have approached our company in the past in order to move the freight transport off the highways. We would not be able to test boarding procedures it still would be the most complete prototype.

  • Questions and next steps:1. What other prototypes might make sense?

    2. How much can the different elements be tested on a scale

    3. How much would the prototype cost?

    DISCUSSIONJ O I N T H E

    W W W . J U M P S T A R T F U N D . C O M

  • HYPERLOOPT R A N S P O R TAT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S

    THE FUTURE IS

    NOW

  • CONCLUSIONAs you can see, a lot of work has already been done on the Hyperloop. By this time youve been able to see there is still a lot more to do.. Let us re-iterate that we are open to all sorts of ideas. Bring your creativity, your interest, and your desire to do something radically different about mass transit in the United States and the world. Together, well all be amazed at what we can accomplish.

    To register to become a member of the team, or just to throw ideas around, please visit www.jumpstartfund.com. We look forward to collaborating with you!

    HYPERLOOPT R A N S P O R TAT I O N T E C H N O L O G I E S

    Graphic layout and design of this document developed by Grant J. Kidney. Contact: [email protected]

  • Las Vegas

  • Los Angeles

  • Mountain range

  • new york city

  • Philadelphia

  • Pittsburgh

  • san francisco

  • washington d.c.