Slashdot Mirror


Vacuum-Controlled Elevator Developed

Aenox writes "Vacuum Elevators of Florida have released a one-man elevator system that easily slots into buildings. It has gone on sale in the U.S. for around $20,000 and uses only electricity to power vaccum-inducing suction turbines that can lift 204Kg several floors up. They claim it provides a smooth ride but from the video it looks like it could use some oil."

32 of 313 comments (clear)

  1. Failsafes by BWJones · · Score: 5, Interesting

    But O'Connor adds that a series of mechanical breaks will activate should there be a sudden loss of pressure, to prevent the capsule falling.

    I'm glad to see this because this was my first thought on watching the video. I can imagine all sorts of overly dramatic Hollywood type scenarios...... Cut the power to the building.....drama ensues. Or, a couple of well placed bullets into the side of the plexiglas causing a sudden implosion and dramatic falling of the lift. Also, one would want to ensure there are no leaks from the capsule to the inside of the lift tube. That sort of thing could play havoc on your eardrums, sinuses and eustachian tubes. Ask anyone who has been in a plane when they open a cargo door before completely equalizing the pressure in the cabin...... Wow, talk about uncomfortable.

    --
    Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    1. Re:Failsafes by LurkerXXX · · Score: 4, Informative

      No. They are the same type purely mechanical types used in your standard elevator. If the cable breaks on a normal elevator, they also need to have some means of preventing you from plummeting to your death. The same systems are in use. Engineers thought long long ago about power failures during emergencies. You aren't the first to think about it.

    2. Re:Failsafes by DrEldarion · · Score: 4, Funny

      But O'Connor adds that a series of mechanical breaks will activate

      Oh shit, that sounds dangerous. I was hoping that it would brake.

    3. Re:Failsafes by Dun+Malg · · Score: 4, Informative
      In fact, as I remember it, one of the first safety elevators was demonstrated at a World's fair (don't remember which one). The demo was the inventor cutting the rope that held the elevator up to the shock and amazement of the crowd.

      Elisha Otis, at the 1853-54 World's Fair. Interesting history of the safety elevator here.

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    4. Re:Failsafes by Dun+Malg · · Score: 4, Informative
      By the way, Elisha Otis, inventer of the safety elevator, died in an elevator accident.

      No he didn't. He died of diptheria during an epidemic in 1861.

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    5. Re:Failsafes by drsquare · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah, whilst in an elevator, which was having an accident. He decided to end the pain by cutting off the electricity to the building, which caused the elevator to immediately plummet to the ground, killing everyone inside, including Otis. He killed some innocent people, but the pain of dying by diptheria is so long and horrible, it was his only option.

    6. Re:Failsafes by Richard_at_work · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Actually, depressurisation events are fairly common, as incidents go, and very survivable. United Airlines flight 811 suffered one of the worst when the front righthand cargo door opened in flight due to faulty wiring and none functional safety devices on it, at 23,000ft. The resulting depressurisation blew out most of the right hand side of the cabin before the wing and ejected a number of passengers. The aircraft landed safely. Funnily enough, this was the fourth instance of this happening, and Boeing hadnt even looked at the problem.

  2. Editor desperately needed at NewScientist.com by TripMaster+Monkey · · Score: 5, Insightful


    Does NewScientist.com have editors?

    Call me picky, but if you're doing a professional publication, there are some standards you ought to uphold.

    But O'Connor adds that a series of mechanical breaks will activate should there be a sudden loss of pressure, to prevent the capsule falling.

    Well. this certainly doesn't sound promising. I would think that in the event of a sudden loss of pressure, the elevator would 'break' quite satisfactorily on its own, without the need for additional mechanical help.

    The elevator costs between $20,000 and £22,000.

    That's actually quite a large price range, once you figure out the exchange rate.

    Clearly someone over at NewScientist.com is asleep at the switch. The sad fact is that this is nothing new....even sadder is the fact that this sort of thing is now acceptable, even in professional publications.

    --
    ____

    ~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey

    1. Re:Editor desperately needed at NewScientist.com by Timesprout · · Score: 4, Funny

      But O'Connor adds that a series of mechanical breaks will activate should there be a sudden loss of pressure, to prevent the capsule falling.

      This statement is actually correct. In the event of a sudden loss of pressure mechanical arms break some of the passengers limbs and jam them into the sides of the elevator to prevent the elevator from falling, so technically they are mechanical break brakes.

      --
      Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
      What truth?
      There is no dupe
    2. Re:Editor desperately needed at NewScientist.com by TripMaster+Monkey · · Score: 3, Funny


      ...which is a far bigger problem than one or typographical errors in an article.

      "one or typographical errors"? *sigh*

      Your post proves my point more eloquently than I ever could. Thank you.

      --
      ____

      ~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey

    3. Re:Editor desperately needed at NewScientist.com by TripMaster+Monkey · · Score: 3, Insightful



      Does it?


      Well, yes...we've established that.


      Tell me that there are people of reasonable IQ who would read that sentence and not know what I was saying.


      Spelling and grammar rules exist so that people don't have to guess the meaning of a particular sentence. We have standards for a reason.


      Personally, I rather an article has factuality over some anal compliance with grammar.


      Personally, I wonder why you feel the two must be mutually exclusive.


      You personally may prefer grammatically correct lies over truths that contain a couple of spelling mistaeks [sic].


      My my, that's a mighty fine straw man you're building over there...just don't try to hang my name on him.
      Just for the record, you were the one who introduced the (non)issue of factual accuracy into this conversation. Nowhere have I ever said that grammatical correctness is preferable to factual accuracy, and for you to attempt to insinuate that I did is disingenuous.

      .. why are typografikal issues a major concern?


      OK...now you're just being childish.

      I don't get it.

      Yes...you're making that painfully clear.


      Aren't there other things in the world for someone like you to be concerned about?

      Yes, but unlike you, I apparently have this preternatural ability to be concerned about multiple issues at once.


      Let me ask you this, what is it that you do?


      I'm a network administrator...not that my current employment is pertinent to this discussion...

      I mean, give some credibility as to why people should follow your advice.

      Because it's not *my* advice...it's the elementary rules of spelling, punctuation, and grammar. It's not like I'm somehow privy to the mysterious dark secrets of the English language...these rules are available to anyone who cares to pick up a textbook. Any highschool English teacher who read that article would have found the same errors I did.

      Who exactly are you "Trip Master Monkey"?

      Actually, if you would bother to read my previous posts, you would see that it's 'TripMaster Monkey', but perhaps I'm being *too* picky now... ^_^

      And why should we listen to you..

      Starting a sentence with a conjunction, question without a question mark, and two periods. I think you just answered your own question.

      --
      ____

      ~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey

    4. Re:Editor desperately needed at NewScientist.com by mdfst13 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Personally, I rather an article has factuality"

      However, the article does not. Mixing British Pounds and US Dollars as it does is a *factual* mistake. It presumably meant to say twenty to twenty-two of one currency or the other. What they actually said was something like $15,000 off at one end or the other.

      Yes, factual issues are more important than typographical issues. However, typos are easier to catch than errors. There is no reason not to make the minimal effort to catch the typos. You will catch some number of errors along the way (e.g. the incorrect currency symbol). Further, the minimal effort needed to find typos is still needed if you want to find errors, as you need to find where statements regarding facts are being made.

      Another way of saying this is "If your realtor adds a 0 to the end of your house price, that is a typo. Would you then pay it as typos are unimportant?"

    5. Re:Editor desperately needed at NewScientist.com by fdobbie · · Score: 3, Funny

      Does NewScientist.com have editors?

      If this upsets you, why are you reading Slashdot?!

  3. Not too expensive... by seanadams.com · · Score: 5, Funny

    The elevator costs between $20,000 and £22,000.
    Sweet. My new Prius gets between 812448 RPH and 48 MPG. I think I've saved enough on gas to get one of these...

  4. Vacuum Elevators? by Agret · · Score: 5, Funny

    Futurama here we come!

    --
    Have you metaroderated recently?
  5. It's like... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    the world's largest penis pump. Good grief, I can't believe I just said that.

  6. The future makes me shiver... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny
    Mr. Johnson : WHere are the annual reports, Rick ?
    Rick : I think Richard Harrelson has them.
    Mr. Johnson : Get Richard in here NOW !

    Zoooooooof - plop

  7. For Us Americans... by Doc+Squidly · · Score: 3, Informative

    ... 204 Kg = ~450 lbs

    --
    I think I think, therefore I think I am.
    1. Re:For Us Americans... by Nicholas+Evans · · Score: 3, Funny

      Then it isn't for us Americans, now is it? It may be able to move Brits or Canadians around, but certainly not us.

    2. Re:For Us Americans... by Cadallin · · Score: 3, Funny

      2?! HA! Try one american, bucko, and the pneumatic pumps will be straining the whole lift.

  8. Unfortunately at 204kg load capacity by Timesprout · · Score: 4, Funny

    There are only 96 people in the US that it can actually lift....

    oops make that 74, McDonalds are doing an all you can eat special today.

    --
    Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
    What truth?
    There is no dupe
  9. The Elderly and Disabled by mekkab · · Score: 4, Informative

    Laziness and status aside;

    The real answer is for the Elderly and the disabled. IF you check out That Home Site you'll find a lot of interest in residential elevators. If it isn't feasible to buy a single level house, an elevator allows you full access to your entire abode.

    --
    In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
  10. Re:/.ing by UCFFool · · Score: 3, Informative

    Elevator1.mpeg
    Courtesy of mirrordot.org.

    --
    "The more pity, that fools may not speak wisely what wise men do foolishly" - Touchstone,Shakespeare's "As You Like It"
  11. These people are missing the main market. by BrianH · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The primary market for residential elevators is for the elderly and wheelchair bound. From what I can see, this elevator isn't stable or safe enough for a frail elderly person, and it isn't large enough to fit a wheelchair or scooter.

    So the only market for this thing is going to be for rich people who'd rather blow money on a toy than take the stairs. While I'm sure there's a market for that, it's not going to be a big one.

    --

    There is nothing so pathetic as seeing a beautiful young theory roughed up by a tough gang of facts.
  12. I don't get it ... by Lemurmania · · Score: 4, Interesting

    SOmething's really odd here -- the people who would most need this are folks who are in wheelchairs. And yet the tube is clearly too narrow for any sort of handicapped person. Why invent a freaking elevator for the people who don't need one? Do they have a handicapped version? Looking at the size of the capsule, I doubt a person with arm braces could fit in there. It seems really cruel to make an easy-to-install elevator that won't fit the people who need it.

  13. Re:This technology was first used... by atomm1024 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Aha, so there's prior art? Then I guess we won't see them succeed at patenting it, if they try.

    I've heard that many an inventor has been foiled by prior art in fantasy movies. I move that we declare fantasy movies illegal, in order to protect intellectual property. Fantasy/scifi movies are like pirating the future!

    --
    Signature.
  14. Only electricity? by conteXXt · · Score: 3, Insightful

    news flash:

    elevators don't run on guinea pig droppings. All modern elevators (excepting perhaps the Space Elevator) run on ONLY electricty.

    Did I miss something here?

    --
    The truth about Led Zep should never be told on /. (Karma suicide ensues)
  15. Re:My Uncle made an elevator by bluGill · · Score: 4, Informative

    Simple physics. Your water pressure it between 20 and 60psi. (Anything higher will break hoses) City water is generally on the high end because cities have to reach the upper floors of houses on top of hills, and regulators are a lot each to install and maintain than pumps. Well water is often on the low end because you set it for what you need.

    20 psi means that if you have a tube with a piston with one square inch of surface area, the piston will hold up 20lbs. A little math and you can find how big a piston you need to lift the weight (Not mass, we care about fighting gravity) you are concerned about. Now just place the piston in a tube long enough, and apply water. It will lift your elevator.

    The hard part is making this without digging a hold DOWN 2 stories to place your tube in. There are many solutions to this, they are left as an exercise for the reader.

  16. Does vacuum seem an odd choice? by lazlo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It would seem to me that there's a limit to the amount of vacuum you can get above an elevator, but no limit in the pressure you could generate below it. I mean, if the elevator is 4 feet across, then the absolute theoretical limit of wieght that could be pulled up by suction (assuming standard sea-level pressure) would be...

    interesting. Google can't parse:

    (pi * ((inches in 1 foot * 2)^2) * psi in 1 atm) / lbs in 1 ton

    but substituting in values, you get:

    (pi * ((12 * 2)^2) * 14.6959488) / 2000 = 13.2965812

    OK. I guess that's not so very strange after all. In a 4 foot wide elevator, you can lift 13 tons with a hard vacuum above it. Damn. 15psi sure does add up quick.

    --
    Pound! Bang! Bin! Bash! is this a shell script or a Batman comic?
  17. Re:Failsafes - image links, etc by loraksus · · Score: 3, Informative

    A rather low resolution image is
    Here
    Probably a better example is Aloha Airlines flight 243, which looked a whole shitload worse.
    Check out the picture on page 2
    Only one fatality, which is kind of amazing if you look at the pictures (flight attendant blown out).

    --
    1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
  18. You cant dig down in florida! by apg88 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This company is from florida. As someone else stated before, a piston elevator would need a hole as deep as the elevator is high. When you are in florida, if you dig down, water comes out. This elevator is good for homes that cant dig for a pneumatic piston and cant have a huge pulley system to pull the elevator. They'll probably use it for two floor hotel suites and things like that.