Circular Transportation Presentation – PDF

Skytrak – A New Era for
Vertical and “Circular”
Transportation
presented by
Adrian Godwin BSc DMS MCIM CEng MIET
Chairman, Lerch Bates Europe
Overview
Background, Pursuit of Building Efficiency
Changing Requirements, Needs and Wants
New Geometries, New Building Communities, New Opportunities
Going Back in History
Challenges for “Rope-less” Lifts and Horizontal Cabin Transfer
Business Case for “Skytrak”
Traffic Handling Capability
EC-Type Certification and EHSR’s
Human Comfort Design Criteria
A Look at “Conventional” vs “Circular Elevatoring”
Skytrak – Two “Prime Movers” / Four Inventions
Basis of Motor and Retarder Design / Cabin Weight
Low & High Speed Drives and Novel Transfer “Switch”
Visual Simulation
Background
• The safety gear was publicly displayed by
Elisha Graves Otis in 1853 at the Crystal
Palace fair in New York
• It’s now over 150 years since this landmark
invention and the uttering of the words “all
safe gentlemen, all safe”
• Just think how far the aviation industry has
moved since the Wright brothers took off in
1903!
• Today we want to prove that a new era for
vertical transportation is about to unfold with
the necessary inventions and technology
now, at last, in place to enable the lift industry
to finally take off!
Background
•
•
•
•
Density of office occupancy is increasing
Land becomes ever scarcer and more valuable
Buildings have to get more efficient
Elevator systems have to work harder!
Besides.....
• Architects want a new degree of freedom for vertical transportation
systems
• New energy efficient “green” self-contained communities need to
be established
• Multiple cabins need to travel in one shaft to reduce the number of
lift shafts deployed in buildings
Pursuit of Building Efficiency Gains
Areas addressed in the recent past include:
 Application of “Destination Hall Call” control systems
 Double deck, “TWIN” lifts and 3-D “Double Deck Destination” Control
 Shuttle & Local Goods Lift Services similar to Passenger Lifts
 Time Sharing of Lifts to achieve 24 hour utilisation (multi-use towers)
 Combining Different Uses of Decks/ Entrances at Different Times
Now, the technology is around to address:
 Multiple Autonomous Cars in One Hoistway
 “Skytrak” - the next generation of people mover technology
Requirements are Changing! Why?
 Building geometry is becoming more complex
 Steel, glass and other materials can be custom cut
 Architects want unique shapes of buildings
 Transit between buildings and complexes is required
 Need to move people from major transportation hubs
 Building in city centres very constrained
 New integrated transportation solutions required
My building is curved why can’t my
Vertical Transportation be!?
Vertical Transportation needs to
respond to the architect’s wants!
July 2010
Beijing CBD
Competition
Entry
New Building Geometries ....
New Building Communities ...
RESTAURANTS, CLUBS, VIEWING
APARTMENTS
SERVICED OFFICES
HOTEL
OFFICES
RETAIL
You are just one journey away from
anything and everything in the building!
New Building Opportunities ...
Going Back in History....
A paternoster or paternoster lift is a passenger
elevator which consists of a chain of open
compartments (each usually designed for two
persons) that move slowly in a loop up and down
inside a building without stopping. Passengers can
step on or off at any floor they like. Courtesy Wikipedia
First built in 1884 by Londoner J. E. Hall as the Cyclic Elevator, the name
paternoster ("Our Father", the first two words of the Lord's Prayer in Latin) was
originally applied to the device because the elevator is in the form of a loop and is
thus similar to rosary beads used as an aid in reciting prayers.[1]
Paternosters were popular throughout the first half of the 20th century as they
could carry more passengers than ordinary elevators. They were most common in
continental Europe, They are rather slow elevators, typically travelling at about
0.3 metres per second, thus improving the chances of jumping on and off
successfully.
Today, in many countries the construction of new paternosters is no longer
allowed because of the high danger of accidents (people tripping or falling over
when trying to enter or alight). Five people were killed by paternosters from 1970
to 1993.
Paternoster Lift Installations e.g.
University of Sheffield Arts
Tower are being modernised
Many universities wish to retain their
paternoster lift installations as, in
many instances, replacing it with one
or maybe two lifts in each shaft
significantly degrades the handling
capacity rendering many uses of the
existing buildings impossible!
Today...
History is repeating itself…
The first new paternoster lift installation has
recently been handed over and is
operational at the new four floor Berlin HQ
of Solon SE.
German elevator contractor Schoppe-Keil,
engineering certification firm TÜV, and the
Berlin State Office for Occupational Safety
adding some high-tech safety features. For
example, flashing green and red lights tell
users when to step on and off. A visual
detection system arrests the lift if one pokes
even part of your foot past the threshold
when the lights are flashing red.
History
You don’t have to look far in the world of patents to see the ideas have
been there for 40 years or more!
History
This complex arrangement
envisaged linear motor
driven cabins that could be
switched on to local guide
rails to stop at floors and
could even be disengaged
and transferred horizontally!
History
This design also harks back to the Paternoster principle of cabins rotating
between up and down shafts in the overhead space...
Hitachi “Circulating Elevator System”
The Challenges of Ropeless vs Roped!
(Making it possible for a lift to traverse a curved trajectory)
Some of the more important challenges are:
1.
Guide support structure that can ensure equivalent ride quality
2.
Increase in drive motor power by up to 6 times
3.
Increase in energy losses of up to 6 times
4.
Maintaining vertical orientation of the lift car
5.
Transmission of power and data to/from the lift car without trailing cables
6.
Increase in the braking force required from the fail-safe brake
7.
Manual release of the fail-safe brake for passenger release not feasible
8.
Impact of emergency stopping in either direction
What Conventional Elevators Can’t Do!
 Run at high speed on an incline/varying incline
 Not impose heavy structural loads at high level
 Enable multiple cabins to run in one shaft
 Operate in environmentally harsh conditions
 Move cabins in 2 or 3 dimensions away from the pure vertical
 Enable horizontal as well as vertical movement
 Provide direct access to levels above 700m high
 Run autonomously without the need for ropes, cables etc
Horizontal Transfer of Cabins (?)
Moving elevator cabins sideways out of the lift shaft has
always presented numerous problems
 Engaging/disengaging cabins from the track
 Mechanical handling challenges, noise, reliability, space
 Horizontal accelerations for occupants
etc etc ...
“Skytrak” has a simple solution for this problem...
Business Case – Office Tower
 Let’s say we have a 36 floor office building with up to 7500 occupants
including 4 trading floors requiring 27 lifts
Business Case – Office Tower
 This is what the core might look like at the ground floor...
Business Case –
Office Tower
 Suppose instead of the low
and high rise passenger lift cores
shown here we had just one lift
core serving all floors
 It would be easier for
occupants to travel around the
building as there’s no need to
transfer between lift groups
Business Case – Office Tower
 Let’s say then that the low rise group of lifts shown in plan in the red
rectangle below were no longer required...
Business Case – Office Tower
 What would be the value of the space saved?
Low Rise Plan Area approx. 160 sq m.
Low rise occupies G and 22 floors above, total 23 floors
Total Area Take 3,680 sq m
VALUE OF SPACE RELEASED = 100/5.5 x £50 per sq ft *
= £909 per sq ft
= £9,774 per sq m (1 sq ft = 0.093 sq m)
TOTAL VALUE OF SPACE RELEASED = £36m
* Source: Davis Langdon Cost Consultants
Business Case – Office Tower
 What additional savings do we gain from not building the low rise lift
core?
Nine Low Rise Lifts @ £350k
£3.15m
Concrete Core Lift Shafts, Pits, Machine Room
£1.5m
Electrical and Mechanical Services
£350k
Fit Out of Low Rise Lift Lobbies
£500k
Plus, save one high rise lift @ £500k
£500k
TOTAL VALUE OF SAVINGS = £6m
Summary of Business Case
 Additional Value of Space £36m
 Savings Generated £6m
 The budget for the eight high rise lifts @ £500k = £4m
 Take savings generated by not constructing the low rise lifts and place
into high rise vertical transportation solution
 £6m plus £4m = £10m (£2.5m per up/down system if four up/down
systems can provide the requisite service)
 If the new vertical transportation solution costs no more than two and a
half times the cost of the high rise lifts then the developer gets the £36m
value “for free” !
Traffic Handling
Any new “universal” vertical transportation system must meet or
exceed all the accepted traffic handling design criteria that we
would normally apply to Class A office buildings today:
• A “quality” of service equivalent to average intervals of 25-30s
meaning average waiting time of 18 to 23s
• A “quantity” of service equivalent to 12 to 15% of building
population during “up peak” 5-minutes
• An “average time to destination” of the order of 90s
• Average waiting time <40s in 2-way lunchtime traffic with 12% of
building population being moved during “peak” 5-minutes
Traffic Handling
Let’s look at our business case building again, original design was this:
Traffic Handling
Proposed Design has eight lift shafts serving the entire building:
Traffic Handling
The floors served are levels 5 to
36 i.e. 32 levels
The building population, for
purposes of traffic calculations, is
12.5 sq m per person. The revised
design adds back 3,680 sq m
giving a roughly uniform floor plate
with 159 persons per floor, total
5,088 persons
Traffic Handling
Original design criteria for “Up Peak”
was 15% 5-minute handling capacity
with an average waiting time of 25s
and cars loaded to 80% of design
loading i.e. 17 persons in a 21 person
capacity car.
During “up peak” 5-minute period we
need to move 15% x 5,088 persons =
763 persons. That’s about 44 car
departures in the 5-minute period.
Traffic Handling
Of course, in pure “up peak” the
down traffic handling capacity of the
system is unused.
When lunchtime 2-way traffic is
introduced then the system will be
able to handle almost as many
people travelling “down” therefore
during such periods the handling
capacity is of the order of double a
conventional lift system and you can
travel from any floor to any floor!
Traffic Handling
Let’s make a simplistic decision that
the 32 floors to be served by the new
vertical transportation system is
divided into four subzones during the
morning “up peak” period each shown
coloured in the diagram opposite.
Each pair of shafts will therefore need
to deliver 15% x 1,272 persons, the
“sub zone” population, or 191 persons
per 5 minutes
Traffic Handling
If we start by treating the performance of the individual car as being
similar to a gearless lift running at 2.5m/s we might use the following
parameters for the purposes of a standard traffic calculation:
Traffic Handling
Doing this and looking at the performance of one lift serving the top
eight floors of the building we would find, from so-called H and S
tables, that the highest reversal floor would be 7.9 and the probable
number of stops 7.2. The following traffic calculation results would be
obtained for the “round trip” of a single car travelling up the building,
stopping and then returning to the main lobby :
Traffic Handling
So, now we know that one car in “up peak” would normally return to the
main floor lobby after around 212s however we need to allow for the
time of transferring the car from the “up” to the “down” shaft and vice
versa. Let’s assume this adds a total of 60 s to the “round trip time”
The adjusted “round trip time” would be of the order of 272s. If we have
a 27s average headway (average interval) between cars departing in
each “up” shaft this will produce the desired handling capacity of
300/27 * 17 persons per car = 189 persons in 300s (5 minutes).
This would also imply a ten car system in each pair of lift shafts. Four
cars travelling “Up” , four “Down” and two transferring between shafts,
one at each terminal.
By applying a “destination” control system and refining the overall traffic
strategy it may be possible to reduce the number of stops, round trip
time and the number of cars in each system.
Traffic Handling
If we look at the average time to destination at around the mid-point of
the building we would have the following calculation:
Non-stop trip to mid floor of office zone i.e. 90m above ground takes
42s. Each floor stop will take 10s so after 4 stops we would have an
average time to destination of about 82s.
Of course passengers travelling to the top of the building experience a
longer ATTD than passengers travelling to the lower floors but this is
normal in any building.
By planning ahead of journeys and “destination” control we may be
able to improve on this figure.
It is clear that because of the huge handling capacity of the system in
2-way lunchtime traffic an average waiting time of 40s would easily be
met with 12% 5-minute traffic.
Safety Requirements

Any new “universal” vertical transportation system must meet or
exceed all the accepted safety standards that apply to placing lifts
into passenger service
 Basically, in Europe, we would need an EC Type Examination
under the Lifts Directive
 In the UK we have to refer to “The Lifts Regulations 1997” and this
informs us in Schedule 5 B (Annex V to the Lifts Directive) how to
achieve EC type-examination of lifts
EC Type-Examination of Lifts
The process for doing this is, in summary:
 A technical dossier must be submitted containing a general
description, manufacturing drawings, test results etc
 A model or prototype of the lift needs to be made available that
serves at least three levels (top, middle and bottom)
 The model lift must comply with Schedule 1 i.e. Annex I of the Lifts
Directive which contains the “Essential Health and Safety
Requirements”
 A “Notified Body” must certify that a model lift satisfies the
requirements of the Directive
Essential Health & Safety
Requirements
Below are listed some of the key requirements, set out as 36 points;
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Conduct a design risk assessment (DRA)
Design and construct the lift taking account of the assessment
Car must offer space and strength to suit intended
load/persons. Rated load must be shown on a plate in the car
Allow for access and use by disabled persons
Means of support must ensure overall level of safety to
“minimise the risk of the car falling”
Minimum of two independent ropes or chains, if used
Essential Health & Safety
Requirements (cont)
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Lift must not start if overloaded.
Lift must have an over-speed limitation device.
“Fast lifts” must have speed monitoring and speed-limiting
devices.
All passenger lifts must have their own individual machinery.
Lift machinery must not be accessible except for maintenance
and emergencies.
Functions of all controls must be clearly indicated
Essential Health & Safety
Requirements (cont)
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
Electrical equipment must be installed and connected such that
there can be no confusion with circuits which do not have any
direct connection with the lift
Electrical equipment must be so installed and connected that
movements of the lift are dependent on electrical safety
devices in a separate electrical safety circuit
A fault in the electrical installation must not give rise to a
“dangerous situation”
The space in which the car travels must be inaccessible except
for maintenance and emergencies. When someone enters such
space normal use of the lift must be stopped
The design must prevent the risk of crushing when the car is in
one of its extreme positions. The design must afford for refuge
spaces to be available
Landing entrance doors must be of adequate mechanical
resistance
Essential Health & Safety
Requirements (cont)
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
Starting movement of the car must be prevented unless all
landing doors are shut and locked. An interlocking device must
prevent such movement during normal operation
An interlocking device must prevent, during normal operation,
the opening of a landing door when the car is still moving and
outside a prescribed landing zone
Lift cars must be completely enclosed by full-length walls and
doors, fitted floors and ceilings with the exception of ventilation
apertures
The car doors must remain closed and interlocked if the lift
stops between two levels if there is a risk of a fall
In the event of failure of power or any component the lift must
have devices to prevent free fall or uncontrolled upward
movement *
The device preventing free fall must be independent of the
means of suspension of the car *
Essential Health & Safety
Requirements (cont)
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
The device must be able to stop the car at full rated load and at
maximum speed. Any stop caused by such device must not
cause deceleration harmful to the occupants whatever the load
condition *
Buffers must be installed between the bottom of the shaft and
the floor of the car but not if the car cannot enter the refuge
space by reason of the design of the drive system
The lift must not be set in motion unless the devices preventing
free fall or stopping the car at rated load and maximum speed
are not in an operational position
The landing or car doors or both, where motorised, must be
fitted with a device to prevent the risk of crushing when they
are moving
Fire rating of landing doors must meet any fire rating required
Counterweights must be installed so as to avoid any risk of
colliding with or falling on to the car
Essential Health & Safety
Requirements (cont)
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
Lifts must be fitted with means enabling passengers trapped in
the car to be released
Cars must be fitted with a two-way means of communication
Lift car operation should shut down if the temperature in the
machine room exceeds the maximum set by the installer
Cars must have sufficient ventilation for passengers in the
event of a prolonged trapping
Cars need to be adequately lit when in use or the doors are
opened, there must also be emergency lighting
In the event of fire the control circuits of the lift must be
designed to prevent the lift stopping at certain levels and allow
for priority control of the lift by rescue teams.
Proposed Prototype Test Track for
Vertical and Circular Versions
Human Comfort
Any new vertical transportation system must meet or exceed all the
accepted human comfort criteria that we would normally specify for a
conventional lift
These criteria include;
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Horizontal and Vertical Vibrations
In-Car Noise Levels
Acceleration / Deceleration Rates
Jerk Rates
Emergency Retardation Rates
Stopping / Levelling Accuracy
Human Comfort (cont)
1a.
Horizontal Vibration
= 15 milli g or less
(the side to side or back to front movement of the car)
1b.
2.
Vertical Vibration
In-Car Noise Levels
= 15 milli g or less
= 50 dBA or less
(the noise level inside the car during all running conditions)
Human Comfort (cont)
3.
Acceleration / Deceleration Rates
for Vertical Applications = 1.0 m/s/s
(i.e. similar to conventional lift applications)
For curved trajectory the acceleration and deceleration rates might be
variable depending on the location of the car on the curve. However, it
should not exceed 1.0 m/s/s
For example, when the car is accelerating near the bottom of a curve,
lateral acceleration will be experienced by the user in the car, therefore
the acceleration rate should be reduced in order to minimise discomfort to
the user in the car
Human Comfort (cont)
4. Jerk Rates
= 1.5 m/s/s/s
(i.e. similar to conventional lift systems)
5. Emergency Retardation Rates
< 0.98 m/s/s
6. Stopping / Levelling Accuracy
= +/- 5mm
Summary of Human Comfort
Design Criteria

Meet all “normal” performance times e.g.
acceleration, jerk and door operating times

Useful speed range 1.0 to 6.0 m/s (300m in 60s)

Simple emergency egress when power lost

Smooth deceleration <1.0g in emergency stop

Noise levels < 50dBA in car and in lobbies
A Look at “Conventional Elevatoring”
Below is a plan, at ground floor, of conventional passenger lifts required
for a high rise office building
There are four groups of 6 passenger lifts @ 1600kg at speeds 2.5 to
6.0m/s giving 15% 5-minute handling capacity and an average interval of
30s. At the main lobby the lift shafts and lobbies occupy 400 sq m:
And what “Circular Elevatoring” ...
Alternatively one passenger lift @ 1600kg at 6.0m/s appearing within
each of four shafts travelling “up” with an average interval of 30s would
give the same service.
At the main lobby we would have a revised footprint of lift shafts and
lobbies that looked like this:
The 5th shaft, shown in red, is
for “down” travelling
passengers in “up peak”
Might Look Like....
The main lobby now has a footprint of lift shafts and lobbies that
would occupy about 80 sq m or 80% less than today’s
“conventional” lift solution!
One of the many compelling arguments to adopt “Skytrak” and it’s
multi-car technology
A “Visualisation” of Skytrak ...
SUMMARY
What happened in the past was either the project did not
proceed or the architect was constrained to use
Conventional Vertical Elevators (or possibly linear inclined)!
There is a compelling argument and need for a new
“Universal” form of vertical transportation capable of having
many cars travelling in the same shaft and being able to
negotiate away from the vertical ...
Skytrak Design Considerations
Let’s reflect upon some of the basic design considerations concerning a
multicar rope-less lift system:
 Simple, efficient and quick mechanism for moving lift cabins from UP
to DN and DN to UP at terminals
 Secure wireless communication to transfer commands from main
control to moving lift cabins
 Satisfactory means of dealing with trapped passengers in an
emergency
 Failsafe brakes must now be carried on board
 Increased structural loads will be applied to support track
 Keep cars “on” tracks at all times
Skytrak Design Considerations (cont)





Light weight materials to be used throughout
Cabins to be kept vertical when on curved trajectory
Ride quality like today’s best passenger lifts
Lightest drive motor with the right characteristics
Satisfactory control of deceleration in the UP direction when emergency
stopping occurs
 Speed consistent with meeting ATTD criteria
 Safety is paramount - all ESHR’s must be met
 Minimise overall system cost
A Safety Expert
Will be required to:





Be a Member of Design Development team
Identify and undertake risk analysis
Ensure EHSR’s are addressed in the design
Address the structural design elements
Compile the technical dossier
A Notified Body
Will be required to:





Be a “Member” of Design Team
Examine the EHSR’s
Review the Technical Dossier
Perform EC Type Examination
Allow CE Marking
Quick Look at the Basic Physics ......
CONVENTIONAL
LIFT
ROPELESS
LIFT
W + 1/2L
W+
L
W+ LL
W = 1600kg
W = 1600kg
L=1600kg
L = 1600kg
Net Load = 800kg
Dead Load = 3200kg
800kg @ 2.5m/s
3200kg @ 2.5m/s
800 * 9.81 * 2.5 = 19.6 kW
3200 * 9.81 * 2.5 = 78.5kW
Power requirement at least four times conventional lift!
Countermeasures to Power Input
To mitigate against the otherwise large power requirement we can:

Arrange for a common d.c. power bus to feed both UP and DN
travelling lift cabins. Energy from DN cars is fed back into the bus to
feed UP travelling cars as we use d.c. invertors

Maximum use of light weight components, composites and alloys

Run system at lowest speed consistent with acceptable time to
destination
Skytrak – Two Types of “Prime Mover”
1. Low speed (up to 2.5 m/s) rotational linear motor drive
2. High speed (up to 6.0 m/s) linear motor drive
Skytrak – Four Important Inventions
1.
2.
3.
4.
*
Use of “retarder” to deal with passenger trapping
Emergency “up stopping” solution for high speed
Gearless lantern pinion drive using circular linear motor
Terminal Switching of cars from “up” to “down” shafts
* Patents Pending
Linear Motor
 Simple construction
 Double sided to maximise output
 Single winding embraces large
number of poles
 Moving magnet weight 30kg per
metre
 Stacked as three phase
 Force output 5,500 Newtons per
metre for three phases
Linear Motor (cont)
A one metre unit length of linear motor with stator cross sectional
dimensions as shown can produce 1800 Newtons of thrust
Linear Motor (cont)
PROTOTYPE
TESTING
Bench testing of a
moving magnet
section reacting with a
continuous stator
section has been
undertaken in
sufficient detail to
understand the thrust
output achievable
TEST ING OF MOTOR DRIVE OUTPUT
Linear Motor Thrust Requirement
“LIVE” + DEAD LOAD = 3200kg (see earlier slide)
At this stage let’s be pessimistic about overall efficiency to allow for frictional
losses, magnetic losses etc, say 90%, overall force required therefore
1.0/0.9 * (3200 * 9.81) = 34880 N
Plus force required for acceleration of 0.1g i.e. 0.981 m/s/s
0.1 * 9.81 * 3200 = 3139 N
OVERALL THRUST REQUIRED = 38019 N, say 40,000 N
With 5,500 N of thrust per metre we would need 7.27m of motor on the car
Each 1m of moving magnet weighs 72kg, the motor weighs 523kg
N.B. We get 76 N thrust for each kg of motor (continuously rated)
Using the Linear motor as a “Retarder”
The Triple Function of the Motor
1. Act as a generator when moving to ensure
the battery pack is continuously recharged
2. Act as a motor with sufficient force output
such that when emergency up stopping
occurs it will provide satisfactory
deceleration of the lift cabin in conjunction
with its power invertors and super
capacitor pack
3. Act as a retarder capable of supporting the
gross weight of the lift cabin and
controlling its descent at a slow speed <
1.0 m/s enabling the lift cabin to return
safely to floor level and discharge its
passengers
A prototype of the “tuned generator”
retarder under test is shown here which
provides 8000N retardation per metre
Retardation Requirement
“LIVE” + DEAD LOAD = 3200kg
Overall retardation force required, say
3200 * 9.81 = 31392 N
With 8,000N per metre of retardation available we need
31392 / 8000 metres of “retarder” section, or
3.92m, say 4.0m of retarder stator @ 33kg per metre = 132kg
Emergency Up-Stopping Invention
Design
 Controlled deceleration when emergency stop occurs in the up direction
 Sufficient energy must be stored ”on board” and available at the instant that
any emergency stop in the up direction occurs
 The lift cabin must separate from the failsafe brake chassis in order to allow
the cabin to continue upwards decelerating at approximately 2 to 3m/s/s
 The storage element consists of a super capacitor module containing
sufficient energy to drive a 3200 kg car in the up direction for several seconds
depending on the speed
 This energy to be delivered to the “on board” retarder elements operating as
a motor using a light weight power electronic drive for a short time interval
Emergency Up-Stopping Principle
TRACK AND MAIN DRIVE
Emergency Up-Stopping Principle
TRACK AND SUB FRAME ASSEMBLY
Emergency Up-Stopping Principle
UNDERSIDE OF SUB FRAME ASSEMBLY
Emergency Up-Stopping Principle
• Light weight structure
• 3m diameter drum –
shaped cabin
• Low centre of gravity
• Wound “retarder” stator sections
travel with car
• Passenger entrapment negated
by returning car to nearest floor
below
MAIN CHASSIS AND SUB FRAME ASSEMBLY
Emergency Up-Stopping Principle
•
•
•
•
Brakes, normal stop
Twin magnet tracks
Retarders under car
Power for car
TRACK, SUB FRAME ASSEMBLY AND BRAKES
Emergency Up-Stopping Principle
• Stopping in down
direction
• Retarders underneath
car negate passenger
entrapment by returning
car to low level
OPERATION OF BRAKE
Emergency Up-Stopping Principle
• Stopping in up direction
• Unlatching of car
• Stored energy gives 3s run on
for controlled deceleration
• Retarders control descent back to
main drive assembly
• Car can then return to nearest floor
OPERATION OF BRAKE IN UPWARD DIRECTION
Power Drives for Linear Motor
Available Products
 Sensitron to offer FOC drive with
firmware and software modified to
suit linear motor
 Maximum drive efficiency
achieved in collaboration with
PIAK and CEDRAT
 Experimental work to be carried
out on 5 metre test rig
Track
Design
 Early high speed track
proposal
 Ride quality to acceptable
standard
 Same track for low speed and
high speed
 Capable of being curved
 Use of composite materials
 Moulded to fit linear
motors/retarders
Cabin Assembly
Design (Total weight with rated load to be < 3200kg)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Composite materials
Seating, standing
Battery pack
Capacitor pack
Overspeed monitoring
Inertia switch
Tilt switch
TEC air conditioning
Slewing and slip rings
Secure wi-fi data
Door operator
Load switch
Slip ring
Brakes
Cabin rotational drive
with particle coupling
Skytrak – Cabin Weight Analysis 1597kg
Cabin Main Chassis 200kg
Sub Frame Assembly 50kg
Car, Doors, Floor, Seating etc 150kg
Cabin External Enclosure 50kg
Motor 523kg
Retarder 132kg
Slewing Ring 30kg
Slip Ring 10kg
Brakes 140kg
Logic Controller 10kg
Guide Wheels 100kg
Door Operator 20kg
Wireless Communication 5kg
Battery 60kg
Inertia Switch 1kg
Lift Position Information 1kg
Capacitor Pack & “Tuning” 85kg
Normally Closed Contactors 15kg
Load Switch 5kg
Up Stopping Drive 10kg
Landing Entrances
CONVENTIONAL FIRE RATED LIFT ENTRANCES
Traffic Control and Lobby Arrangements
Design
 Destination Hall Call Control
 Passenger journeys planned ahead and optimised
 Car speeds modulated to control headway
 “Up” cars balanced with “Down” cars
 Back to back redundant group control
 Curved or circular tracks/shafts are parallel
with typical layout shown below
Circular Linear Motor & Lantern Pinion
Slow Speed Drive (<2.5m/s)
 Three single phase linear motor
sections within a 1m diameter circle
 Direct motor drive to lantern pinion at
less than 100 RPM for 2.5 m/s
 Avoids noisy gearing
 Lightweight alloy housing
 Pinion rods or track made of composite
materials
 Two motors used to avoid any backlash
 Combined force output on track 40000
Newtons
Patent Pending
Circular Linear Motor & Lantern Pinion
Slow Speed Drive (<2.5m/s)
 Low speed motor magnetic
design by CEDRAT, PIAK
 Low speed motor
manufactured by
PHASEMOTION, KEB
 Power electronic drives
manufactured by TRIPHASE,
PIAK, ETEL SENSITRON
 Lantern pinion materials to
be refined
Patent Pending
Skytrak – Terminal “Switches”
 Minimum horizontal movement
 Minimum transfer time
 Cars remain “on” track
 Simple pivot drive arrangement
 Plan space of shafts = conventional 1600kg
capacity lifts with side counterweight
 “Through” car design utilised
 No slip rings
Patent Pending
PLAN VIEW
SECTION VIEW
Skytrak – Terminal Parking and/or
Servicing Areas
SECTION AT MACHINE ROOM LEVEL
SECTION AT PIT LEVEL
Patent Pending
“Low Speed” Skytrak – Simulation