The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Can we construct this?  (Read 13653 times)

Offline Hoggart

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
Can we construct this?
« on: 01/11/2015 18:08:09 »
My invention is a new form of transport. Absolutely clean and safe. I called it Urbamobile.
Urbamobile replaces the automobile, saves the environment and returns freedom of movement to people. The solution is here!
Urbamobile is not science fiction. Urbamobile can make your life better! Today!
Urbamobile is full automatic, efficient, and incredibly comfortable. Stay connected with the Internet on board. No traffic jams, no accidents or injuries. And no driver!
Urbamobile is a universal vehicle of the future, but it’s available now.
Urbamobile is round, safe, and environmentally friendly!
See for yourself and decide whether to breathe or suffocate, be stuck in traffic jams or move freely, have no prospects ahead or realize that human mind can overcome fatal despair.
You can see that URBAMOBILE means hope, opportunity, and result!


« Last Edit: 27/11/2015 17:54:36 by Hoggart »


 

Offline evan_au

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4101
  • Thanked: 245 times
    • View Profile
Re: Can we construct this?
« Reply #1 on: 01/11/2015 19:48:59 »
A few initial reactions:
- The drag coefficient/fuel economy doesn't look very good.
- The ground clearance looks too low, and the center of gravity too high. It will probably flip over the first time it hits a speed bump
- Oh... and there's that little hoverboardy thing that we haven't invented yet...
 

Offline syhprum

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3812
  • Thanked: 19 times
    • View Profile
Re: Can we construct this?
« Reply #2 on: 02/11/2015 04:38:09 »
The silly season seems to be in full swing, let us get back to some serious science and technology.
 

Offline VIC

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 9
    • View Profile
Re: Can we construct this?
« Reply #3 on: 02/11/2015 16:52:22 »
A few initial reactions:
- The Drag coefficient /fuel economy doesn't look very good.
- The ground clearance looks too low, and the center of gravity too high. It will probably flip over the first time it hits a speed bump
- Oh... and there's that little hoverboardy thing that we haven't invented yet...
Thank you for "a few initial reactions" but to make it clear how it «looks» let’s solve a simple exercise:
Diameter of the Urbamobile - 2.5 m. Height - 2.0 m. The ground clearance - 0.1 m.
Question 1: At what height should be the center of gravity of urbamobile to be turned over at arrival on the speed bump, which height is 0.1 m.?
 
Question 2: What should be the height of the speed bump that at the location of the front edge of urbamobile from point-blank range on the surface of such speed bump the vertical, built from the center of gravity of urbamobile went beyond the area of its support, even if we assume that the center of gravity of urbamobile is "higher than you can imagine" - at the center of it’s roof?

Question 3: And generally: Is there a practical connection between the ground clearance and probable rolling over at arrival on the speed bump due to alleged "too high" center of gravity?

- “Oh ...” what is this about?


 

Offline VIC

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 9
    • View Profile
Re: Can we construct this?
« Reply #4 on: 02/11/2015 16:55:08 »
The silly season seems to be in full swing, let us get back to some serious science and technology.

Do not worry. "Let us get back to some serious science and technology" - for example, see post # 1.  :)
 

Offline John-H

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 16
    • View Profile
Re: Can we construct this?
« Reply #5 on: 03/11/2015 13:46:11 »
The global road death toll has already reached 1.24 million per year and is on course to triple to 3.6 million per year by 2030! (According to Pulitzer Center on Crisis Reporting). Time for serious science and technology to do something about it.
 

Offline Hoggart

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
Re: Can we construct this?
« Reply #6 on: 03/11/2015 14:01:18 »
The global road death toll has already reached 1.24 million per year and is on course to triple to 3.6 million per year by 2030! (According to Pulitzer Center on Crisis Reporting). Time for serious science and technology to do something about it.
This slaughter could be and should be stopped!
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4699
  • Thanked: 153 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Can we construct this?
« Reply #7 on: 03/11/2015 14:10:10 »
Natural death rate is about 110,000,000 per year. Interesting that road deaths account for 1% globally but only 0.25% in the UK, which is one of the most densely populated and vehicle-congested areas of all, with the highest speed limits of any civilised country.
 

Offline Hoggart

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
Re: Can we construct this?
« Reply #8 on: 03/11/2015 15:58:09 »
Every percent means real people that loose their life or health in road accidents. And there is no technological solution offered to eliminate those casualties. But if the Urbamobile could be such solution isn’t it something we should develop and support?!
« Last Edit: 03/11/2015 16:01:01 by Hoggart »
 

Offline John-H

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 16
    • View Profile
Re: Can we construct this?
« Reply #9 on: 03/11/2015 16:12:29 »
Road traffic injuries are the leading cause of death for young people aged 15–29. (World Health Organization Global status report on road safety 2013). I bet those people would have changed something if they were given a choice.
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4699
  • Thanked: 153 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Can we construct this?
« Reply #10 on: 05/11/2015 23:36:32 »
Mostly, they way they drive. Face it, under-15's don't drive, and over-30's tend to move slower, so we aren't talking about vehicles mowing down pedestrians, but drivers killing themselves and their passengers through bad driving.

But we are also looking at bad statistics. If you have survived to the age of 15 you probably aren't undernourished or suffering from a lifethreatening infectious disease. Under the age of 30, you won't be a serious statistical candidate for heart disease, liver failure or cancer. In fact there is very little (apart from war) that kills 15 - 29 year-olds, so "the leading cause of death" doesn't need to claim many victims to take the gold medal, and the fact that more young adults die from a voluntary, pleasurable and economically useful activity than anything else is, if anything, a sign of a mature civilisation. 
« Last Edit: 05/11/2015 23:43:24 by alancalverd »
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4699
  • Thanked: 153 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Can we construct this?
« Reply #11 on: 05/11/2015 23:42:35 »
Anyway, back to the question. What powers this vehicle? What steers it and what makes it stop? How much CO2 is emitted in its production? If it doesn't get stuck in traffic jams, what have you done with all the other people (every vehicle in a jam contains at least one  person)? It seems to be considerably wider than a large car - how many historic streets do you have to demolish to make way for it, and where are you going to park it? And who the hell wants to "stay connected to the internet" instead of looking at real scenery? 
 

Offline VIC

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 9
    • View Profile
Re: Can we construct this?
« Reply #12 on: 07/11/2015 18:18:37 »
«In fact» - judging by situation - more and more «young» (and adult!) people die not «from a voluntary, pleasurable and economically useful activity» but from the foolishness. Therefore, it will be better for all if transport is not to be driven by people but by the System. And that, if you will, looks more like «a sign of a mature civilization».
For the car - with its unpredictable complex forms, tending to absolute unsuitability for any calculations and the need to maintain minimal spacing between different cars - it is almost impossible! But for Urbamobile - which round shape and some other technical features allow you to make necessary calculations of the object by single point, to drive in the simplest way and to move in contact with the other Urbamobiles – is optimal to drive in the System.
 

Offline VIC

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 9
    • View Profile
Re: Can we construct this?
« Reply #13 on: 07/11/2015 18:23:00 »
Anyway, back to the question. What powers this vehicle?

The most eco-friendly is electric drive, but the mass use of it in the cars is primarily prevented by the high cost of batteries that have certain performance characteristics, and the impossibility of «filling» the car by simply replacing the battery, first of all - because of the practical impossibility of organizing the cars in optimally managed system. For the Urbamobile these problems do not exist. Why so? - See the previous reply.

What steers it and what makes it stop?
Better to see once (or not once) and hear everything:


Everything should be clear.

How much CO2 is emitted in its production?
CO2 is not the biggest problem (take a deep breath!), more so, as it is known, - the electric motors produce neither CO2 nor any other harmful exhaust gases.

If it doesn't get stuck in traffic jams, what have you done with all the other people (every vehicle in a jam contains at least one person)?
There could be not one but more people inside, however, it is quite possible to place everyone individually
(See:

)

It seems to be considerably wider than a large car - how many historic streets do you have to demolish to make way for it

When it “seems” or “looks” – see the reply # 3. 2.5 m. - is narrower than a standard lane for an ordinary car. So there is no need to demolish anything.

and where are you going to park it?

See HOW -
and
HOW
and hope it will become clear WHERE – anywhere! – unlike the car!

And who the hell wants to "stay connected to the internet" instead of looking at real scenery?

At least those for whom «the fact that more young adults die from a voluntary, pleasurable and economically useful activity than anything else is, if anything, a sign of a mature civilization» - is not the best perspective. They would be obviously happily joined by those who still have something to do «staying connected to the Internet» instead of simply «looking at real scenery».
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4699
  • Thanked: 153 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Can we construct this?
« Reply #14 on: 07/11/2015 23:39:09 »
CO2 is not the biggest problem (take a deep breath!), more so, as it is known, - the electric motors produce neither CO2 nor any other harmful exhaust gases.
Making vehicles of any sort generates a lot of CO2. About 2 tonnes of carbon dioxide per tonne of raw steel, plus maybe another 0.5 tonnes in the manufacturing process. Obviously you won't use steel, 'cos it's heavy and oldfashioned, so you will use aluminum, which requires about 3 times as much CO2 to make the same vehicle. And then you have to generate the electricity to power your car. The cleanest way to to do that is to make a nuclear power station, but that needs concrete and steel: for the first 5 - 10 years of its life, a nuke is only paying back the fossil energy used to make it!

So let's ignore the weight of the elephant for a moment and turn to my simple questions. I now see that it has two wheels which are either tiny (in which case you need a very smooth road) or have been spookily eliminated from the drawing of the interior of the vehicle. The Segway works because the weight of the driver is transmitted through a platform below the axle, so it is stable. This means that the wheelbase must be wider than the occupants. I think you will have a job to make a stable vehicle narrower than a Fiat 500 or MkI Mini, and if it is going to carry between 1 and 4 people with or without luggage, you will need at least one more wheel to provide pitch stability without making everyone vomit, so why not stick with a Fiat 500 or Smart Car?   
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3153
  • Thanked: 44 times
    • View Profile
Re: Can we construct this?
« Reply #15 on: 08/11/2015 01:46:59 »
An ugly in dynamics version of the Sinclair, no different in design than a child's electric car, no one would want to make this, no one would to buy this for general use. However you  may sell a few to a few of the large fun parks, they would be fun to ride around park in like a glorified golf trolley.
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4699
  • Thanked: 153 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Can we construct this?
« Reply #16 on: 08/11/2015 13:35:52 »
Quote
When it “seems” or “looks” – see the reply # 3. 2.5 m. - is narrower than a standard lane for an ordinary car. So there is no need to demolish anything.

Any vehicle wider than 2.55 m requires advance police approval and an escort for movement on public roads in the UK. In the USA the limit is narrower, at 8 ft = 2.44 m, for most roads. This is not an urban runabout, more like a heavy goods truck or a bus, and would require similar skill to operate it. Passing in most UK cities would be impossible.

That's why we have buses and underground trains for urban transport. And some of them even have the beloved internet!
 

Offline John-H

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 16
    • View Profile
Re: Can we construct this?
« Reply #17 on: 08/11/2015 16:13:42 »
What has caused such emotions? The idea of Urbamobile - is brilliant!
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4699
  • Thanked: 153 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Can we construct this?
« Reply #18 on: 08/11/2015 17:56:09 »
There was plenty of emotion in the video clip, but engineering realities tend to interfere with such dreams.

I don't see why a large, unstable, circular car with magic wheels is more brilliant than the small, stable rectangular ones that we already have. If you add autopark (which already exists) and collision avoidance (ditto) to a G-Wizz or similar vehicle, you have an economical city car that any idiot can drive. If you don't like driving, join the other 50 people on a double-deck bus - no problem with parking, recharging, maintenance, or taking up unnecessary amounts of road space.
 

Offline John-H

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 16
    • View Profile
Re: Can we construct this?
« Reply #19 on: 08/11/2015 19:05:40 »
Engineering realities – see on the site about urbamobile.com
Urbamobile does not look like a «dream». The author finds the optimal technical solution to the backlog of transport problems. And thank him for this invention!
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4699
  • Thanked: 153 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Can we construct this?
« Reply #20 on: 08/11/2015 22:15:30 »
OK, now I've seen the second video. Tiny wheels, and probably four of them to prevent pitching. So you need to resurface all your roads and ensure that they are kept completely free of leaves, snow, mud, cigarette ends, and all the other stuff that a 13-inch wheel can roll over.

If you want to be taken at all seriously you will need at least 2 inches of tyre wall to provide sufficient wall heat dissipation and flexion, giving you a minimum wheel diameter of about 6 inches overall. From this, we can work out a whole lot of interesting construction and performance data if we just begin with the intended cruising speed and acceleration parameters.

Any offers for these numbers?
 

Offline Atomic-S

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 928
  • Thanked: 18 times
    • View Profile
Re: Can we construct this?
« Reply #21 on: 09/11/2015 05:32:08 »
I found the video to be not the best-put-together, information-wise.  However, reading between the frames, I conclude that what the system is is an assembly of fully-automatic transportation modules that, apparently, are not owned by any specific driver, but that can be summoned like a taxicab, used, and then released.  And that they are not driven by their occupants, but move on the basis of some manner of automatic control, being so designed that traffic conflicts are automatically prevented.  Conceptually, this is actually a brilliant idea, and could well represent the future of transportation, having the effect of combining the convenience of the personal car with the efficiency of transit.  However, the engineering details appear to be not well worked out in the video.  It is unclear whether each such vehicle will be self-managed, or will be managed by a central city control.  There are engineering advantages to having them centrally controlled. A central computer can look over the entire city traffic situation, all the current destinations desired, and calculate the most efficient routes for all the vehicles.  As for the design of the vehicles themselves:  Rubber bumpers surrounding each may or may not be an essential feature; nor would I consider the round shape to be essential.  What is essential is that there be a high level of automation and technology. I would say that the auto industry today is taking the first tiny steps toward this sort of thing with the new accident-avoidence systems such as lane-departure warnings, automatic braking for a slow vehicle ahead, and even self-driving cars.  The natural evolution of this technology is, I believe, toward something like the Urbamobile; but I tend to think that the round shape is by no means inevitable or even necessarily the best option.  Regardless of what form the ultimate vehicles may obtain, I would envision that eventually, people would often choose not to own cars, but would simply summon one via their smartphone when needed, and it would automatically arrive, and then the people would enter their desired destination into a keyboard (or select it from an on-screen map), press a button, and then sit back and have coffee, read the Kindle, or sleep until the vehicle automatically arrived at the chosen destination.  The whole thing would operate through a centrally controlled automatic traffic system. There are certain issues, however, that need to be addressed. One is that people may have varying needs. One person may simply be commuting to work. Another may be going to the grocery store and have to haul a lot of groceries back. Another may be taking a bunch of kids to some game and may have sports equipment that must be hauled. For these reasons, a one-size-fits-all Urbamobile will not be satisfactory. Various different types will be needed.  As for the design of the vehicles themselves: I don't think this is well worked out in the video.  The two-wheel design has clear maneuverability advantages; however there is a big question in my mind as to stability.  You have to have some way of keeping the thing upright; and that will require somehow dealing with the balance of the load.  Also, braking quickly could be a problem.  Also, the system must be prepared to deal with emergency road conditions other than other Urbamobiles.  This could include errant bicyclists or pedestrians.  Again, fast braking may be required at times, which argue for more than two wheels.  Do we lose maneuverability if we have more than two wheels?  Not necessarily; if all the wheels are involved in steering, extreme maneuverability is still possible. I am unsure however whether we truly require this level of maneuverability.  Already, cars have been built that can parallel-park themselves, having the conventional arrangement of two nonsteering and two steering wheels on the ground.  As for extreme maneuverability in traffic, that too may be unnecessary if the traffic flow is managed in detail by a central computer. So in my opinion, the two-wheel, circular design proposed is by no means necessary to gain most of the advantages of this sort of transport. 
 

Offline Atomic-S

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 928
  • Thanked: 18 times
    • View Profile
Re: Can we construct this?
« Reply #22 on: 09/11/2015 05:36:03 »
And one more thing that requires attention is how the system would deal with bad weather or emergencies such as a power outage.
 

Offline VIC

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 9
    • View Profile
Re: Can we construct this?
« Reply #23 on: 09/11/2015 11:51:14 »
It's positive, when people manage to end empty disputes.
If not so, I wanted to offer the following bet: if the opponent can really (using scientific arguments, i.e. based on the existing patent, normative, regulatory documents) substantiate ALL figures and calculations that have been stated in his Replies - I'm ready to admit vain my hopes on Urbamobile and ready to pay to the opponent’s account a symbolic $ 1,000 I lost in the above bet.
Otherwise - the opponent would have to admit that his judgements about Urbamobile were carelessness and incorrect and in support of Urbamobile - for example - make a contribution in the amount of the same symbolic $ 1,000 lost by opponent in the above bet in support of the project «Urbamobile replaces the car» on Indiegogo.

Concerning the model of Urbamobile and assessing its realism: if the diameter of Urbamobile - 2.5 m., height - 2.0 m., the ground clearance - 0.1 m., then the diameter of the large wheels is taken as 0.3 m., width - 0.2 m., diameter of smaller wheels is taken as 0.2 m., the width - 0.1 m.
The mentioned above parameters of Urbamobile do not need to make more severe rules and requirements for roads neither in Europe nor in the USA. And the above parameters of Urbamobile do not force you to particularly care about the absence of cigarette ends and packing on the roads. More than that – to throw rubbish on the roads is not good in principle.
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4699
  • Thanked: 153 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Can we construct this?
« Reply #24 on: 09/11/2015 17:43:09 »
More than that – to throw rubbish on the roads is not good in principle.

True, but any car I drive has to work in practice, not just in principle. I have an MRI machine that regularly stops working because the cooling air inlet is in the sidewalk and gets clogged with cigarette ends!

http://www.tatasteelconstruction.com/en/sustainability/carbon-and-steel
Quote
Steel is manufactured predominantly using two methods. Both methods of production require a significant input of scrap steel. The primary route uses 13.8% scrap, with emissions of 1.987 tonnes of CO2/tonne of steel.

http://www.calsmelt.com/energy-environmental.html
Quote
Therefore, CO2 emissions per tonne of aluminium produced can range from approximately 16 tonnes CO2 (if coal is used), down to 5.7 tonnes CO2 (if natural gas is used).

UK/Europe law:
Quote
The maximum width for all is 2.55 metres.19 Sep 2012
Moving goods by road - Detailed guidance - GOV.UK
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/moving-goods-by-road

And the US Federal regs (there are state-by-state exceptions for agricultural vehicles)
Quote
ops.fhwa.dot.gov/FREIGHT/publications/size_regs_final.../index.htmThis Act provided a maximum vehicle width of 96 inches (2.44 meters) on the ...

Nuclear power energy payback is a bit more difficult to assess but:
Quote
neinuclearnotes.blogspot.com/.../energy-payback-times-for-nuclear.html4 Apr 2008 - A nuclear power plant takes so much water and energy to build, it has to run for 15 years to offset its carbon footprint,

The figures are all from "industry" sources so are probably minima.

I don't think I quoted any other figures that aren't obvious - you can look at a small car tyre for yourself and read the numbers molded into it.

Your $1000 will be most welcome - why not make a Paypal donation to Naked Scientists? , and at $4000 per hour, I'm happy to play this game with anyone. You will find my fees a lot less than trying to maintain a patent for a machine that doesn't work.
 
« Last Edit: 09/11/2015 17:55:23 by alancalverd »
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Re: Can we construct this?
« Reply #24 on: 09/11/2015 17:43:09 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums