DailyDirt: Scotty, We Need More Power...
from the urls-we-dig-up dept
There could be a new Star Trek TV show ready in a couple years or so (trying to keep up with the Star Wars franchise, no doubt). But real space travel is also making some progress -- with a growing number of private companies trying out new approaches to making more cost effective launch systems. Check out a few of these propulsion concepts that could be powered by "di-lithium" crystals someday.- A company called Escape Dynamics is testing microwave-powered propulsion technology to boost vehicles into space. Microwave transmitters on the ground would zap a ship's propellant to get it to heat up and create thrust (without needing to carry an oxidant on board), and a test vehicle has proven the concept by generating a specific impulse of 500 seconds. If they can refine the technology a bit, they claim to be able to put a 200kg payload into orbit with a single-stage, reusable spaceplane. [url]
- Ion thrusters provide a very efficient means of propulsion for artificial satellites right now, but perhaps a design change could make this type of propulsion more practical for longer trips and not just relatively short bursts of thrust. A "wall-less" Hall thruster design might last far longer than a typical 10,000 hours of operational time for existing Hall thrusters, but more testing will be necessary to optimize this novel ion thruster. [url]
- If you're looking for a bit more oomph, how about a specific impulse of 100,000-250,000 seconds -- generated from lasers aimed at a target for initiating a fusion reaction? Boeing filed a patent on this kind of propulsion in 2012 (which was granted US9068562B1), but it's highly doubtful that laser-initiated fusion/fission thrust will become a reality any time soon. [url]
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: hall thrusters, ion thrusters, lasers, nuclear propulsion, propulsion, space, space exploration, specific impulse, star trek, star wars
Companies: boeing, escape dynamics
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Owning An Idea
Ain’t innovation grand?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Owning An Idea
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Owning An Idea
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Owning An Idea
The more I hear about Patents and how they are abused, the more I wish the system was abolished or at least made rational (and I am not sure that is even possible).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Getting Power Where It Is Needed (The Case of Trains).
1. The Alstom "smart" third-rail system described in the August 2015 issue of Trains. The Alstom system has been installed on streetcar lines in France, in short lengths through "historic districts" where poles and wires are objectionable, and most recently on the full length of a six-mile streetcar line in Dubai, in the Middle East, This system has a third-rail between the other two rails, and at the same height, but the third-rail has sections of insulator, breaking it up into segments of, say fifty feet, and each segment has an electronic switch, so it only becomes "hot" when commanded. The streetcar carries a shield to protect the activated segment from contact, and commands the third-rail segments to "light up" as appropriate. This system is rather more expensive than other methods of electrification, but can be used under circumstances which might preclude the use of these. In the long run, complex manufactured goods tend to become cheap, because they can be made in a factory, with suitable tools. Construction labor in the field remains persistently expensive, however.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://en.wikip edia.org/wiki/Ground-level_power_supply
------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------
2. There are electric buses in China, which are powered by ultra-capacitors, and the capacitors are recharged by overhead wires which only exist at each bus stop. The capacitors only have to hold enough electricity to drive the bus for a quarter-mile or so, from one bus stop to the next, and a capacitor, unlike a battery, can recharge with extreme rapidity, in seconds. The cables at bus stops only cost a small fraction of what a continuous cable would cost. This system is of course extensible to trains. There is no reason why a railroad car cannot carry, say, a hundred tons of capacitors.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www .slideshare.net/ResearchIndia/super-capacitor-buses-in-shanghai-5156990
----------------------------- --------------------------------------------------
3. The John G. Kneiling Inter-Modal Platform, published in Trains back in the early 1980's. This system consisted of a long articulated flatcar (I believe Kneiling stipulated a length of a thousand feet). The articulated car was to be fitted with many motors, a continuous on-board power cable, and power cars (locomotives) at either end. This was before double-stack cars became common, but the concept would be readily extended to them. While this system was never reduced to practice per se, it is nothing more than a "slug" locomotive on a grander scale. Trains normally run miles apart, and the cost of the on-board cable is small compared to that of electrifying trackage in the ordinary way. With suitable control electronics, with each truck motor receiving the optimum power/braking setting, the Intermodal Platform would have substantially the performance of a rail-car. Let us add to this, many pantographs or third-rail brushes, and a sufficiency of capacitors. The brushes or pantographs would retract when not in use, rather like a steam locomotive's water-scoop.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm afraid there is no easily accessible source for Kneiling, he predates the internet, and his material is all paywalled.
http://www.amazon.com/Integral-train-systems-John-Kneiling/dp/B0006CK4NU
http://cs.trains.c om/trn/f/111/t/228469.aspx?page=1
------------------------------------------------------------------- ----
Taken in combination, electrified track would only need to have, say, a hundred or two hundred feet of Alstom "smart" third-rail, every half-mile or so. A short, light train (eg. a commuter train) would rely on its capacitors between third-rail segments. A long, heavy train would always have a brush on a third-rail segment, and would distribute the power from there, via its own internal cable. In many cases, a segment of "smart" third-rail would have its own capacitor, so that it could store electricity for an hour or more, accumulating it from the kind of electrical service which would be suitable for a discount store, and which is readily available where a county road crosses a railroad track, and then release it at a rate of 10,000 hp for a couple of minutes when a train comes by. It would be feasible to create "mini-helper districts," say a thousand or two thousand feet long, with a higher proportion of third-rail, and the ability to transfer electricity from a train going down a grade (dynamic braking) to one going up the grade. In particular, commuter railroads often have short steep grades to achieve grade separation, and electric railcars are able to get up and down them without difficulty.
From the track point of view, the major expense would be that of building out electric grid connections to desolate locations on the main line, such as Abo Canyon in New Mexico.
From the rolling stock point of view, it would be necessary to dispense, once and for all, with idea that a railroad car is a sort of mobile warehouse, to be kept cheap and allowed to clog up the railroad. All classes of cars will have to develop systems for expeditiously loading and unloading, comparable to an inter-modal yard, or else these classes of cars will have to be superseded by specialized containers. For example, an articulated tank car would have many tanks, probably no more than twenty tons each, and a loading manifold, similar to the one in a tank-ship. Once connected to a terminal, it would open and close various valves and separately load and unload the contents of various tanks. Once cars achieved high utilization, it would become feasible to fit a comparatively small number of cars with an evolving standard of running gear.
There is a rather funny story about the "warehouse mentality" at its crudest, which I ran across in Edwin A. Pratt's _The Rise of Rail Power in War and Conquest, 1833-1914_ ( P. S. King & Son, Ltd., London, 1915). It seems that during the Civil War, a Union Army paymaster, seeing an empty boxcar sitting on the main line, decided that it would make an admirable payroll office. So he moved in, and started paying the troops, and forbade anyone to move his "office." This, of course, had the practical effect of throwing the railroad into gridlock.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Getting Power Where It Is Needed (The Case of Trains).
Nice post though, have my insightful vote.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Getting Power Where It Is Needed (The Case of Trains).
Careful there. The same claim, "the only by-product is water" claim gets made about hydrogen-fueled rockets. This ignores that the hydrogen is produced through "steam reforming" from natural gas or other petro-chemicals. Also produced: lots of carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide.
Yes, you can also produce hydrogen through electrolysis of water. But this is by far the most expensive method.
I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure that if you're talking about powering a significant number of trains (or cars) with hydrogen, you'll be generating a lot of CO and CO2 in addition to that water.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Getting Power Where It Is Needed (The Case of Trains).
Overhead catenary wire is much more complex in construction, than electric transmission cable. It not only has to carry electricity, but the wire has to be in exactly the right position, and stretched tight enough to be rigid even when the pantograph shoe is skating along the wire. The desired tension is on the order of 30,000 lbs, which means that if the cable snaps in the course of being installed, it will probably smash the installer's head in. The most difficult part is the last twenty feet or so, repeated many times. Even if a power transmission line had to be built along the railroad tracks to feed segments of third-rail, that would still be much cheaper that building overhead catenary wire.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Getting Power Where It Is Needed (The Case of Trains).
So you do have a point and an important one but it can be done nicely.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]