Slashdot Mirror


Transporting a 15-Meter-Wide, 600-Ton Magnet Cross Country

necro81 writes "Although its Tevatron particle accelerator has gone dark, Fermi Laboratory outside Chicago is still doing physics. A new experiment, called muon g-2 will investigate quantum mechanical behavior of the electron's heavier sibling: the muon. Fermi needs a large ring chamber to store the muons it produces and investigates, and it just so happens that Brookhaven National Laboratory outside NYC has one to spare. But how do you transport a delicate, 15-m diameter, 600-ton superconducting magnet halfway across the country? Very carefully."

152 comments

  1. Magnets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They're magic!

    1. Re:Magnets by game+kid · · Score: 0

      The secret isn't really magic, it's magnet--18 magnets to be exact!

      --
      You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
  2. Hello datacenters by dadelbunts · · Score: 4, Funny

    I would be so tempted to just drive by datacenters wiping all their data. It probably wouldnt work BUT I CAN DREAM CANT I!

    1. Re:Hello datacenters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No you CAN'T.

    2. Re:Hello datacenters by bobthesungeek76036 · · Score: 1

      If it's an electromagnet you would need an aweful big alternator to wipe the datacenter...

      --
      Karma: Bad
    3. Re:Hello datacenters by dadelbunts · · Score: 4, Funny

      The dream police, they live inside of my head. The dream police, they come to me in my bed. The dream police, theyre coming to arrest me, oh no.

    4. Re:Hello datacenters by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 2

      Even if you could drive it around with the coils kept superconductive and under current, good luck trying to avoid all the buildings with structural steel inside!

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    5. Re:Hello datacenters by geirlk · · Score: 1

      Just don't dream while that magnet is driving fast by close to your head.

    6. Re:Hello datacenters by Quasimodem · · Score: 0

      And the guy's wife -- he called you a cheap trick.

    7. Re:Hello datacenters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      don't worry, I saw it this morning. It, and the truck, was hanging from a steel railroad underpass.

    8. Re:Hello datacenters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Modded -1 Offtopic. Glad I posted it AC.

      You fuckers have no humor anymore.

    9. Re:Hello datacenters by Virtucon · · Score: 1

      Preferably an IRS Data center, that would be uber cool.

      --
      Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
    10. Re:Hello datacenters by flibbajobber · · Score: 1

      At 600 tons, I think you could just aim at any datacenter and drive right through it, magnet or not...

    11. Re:Hello datacenters by nitehawk214 · · Score: 1

      No you CAN'T.

      ... don't even try.

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    12. Re:Hello datacenters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just think of the "klang-crush" caused by the attachment.

    13. Re:Hello datacenters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe data centers might be safe, but if that electromagenet became active (somehow) I wouldn't like to get too close with an I-Phone!

  3. Cross country? by jeffmeden · · Score: 1

    Brookhaven to Batavia is only about 1000 miles by even a lax road route. Where the heck is this thing going, on a national tour? The web site claims it will travel 3,200 miles. Is it going to spring break first?

    1. Re:Cross country? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      FTA: "The Muon g-2 ring, an electromagnet made of steel and aluminum, begins its 3,200-mile trek from New York in early June. From there, it will sail by barge down the East Coast, around Florida's tip into the Gulf of Mexico, then up the Mississippi River until it arrives in Illinois."

    2. Re:Cross country? by bdcrazy · · Score: 2

      I would imagine bridge clearances and weight limits on bridges would be at least 2 of the issues leading to the path chosen. (others would be things like permits, powerlines etc)

      --
      Tonights forecast: Dark. Continued dark throughout most of the evening, with some widely-scattered light towards morning
    3. Re:Cross country? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      From the article:
      "... involves loading the ring onto a specially prepared barge and bringing it down the East Coast, around the tip of Florida and up the Mississippi River to Illinois. The ring is expected to leave New York in early June, and land in Illinois in late July. Once it arrives, the ring will be placed onto a truck built just for this purpose, and driven to Fermilab in Batavia, a suburb of Chicago."

    4. Re:Cross country? by tibit · · Score: 2

      It would be way too complex, logistically, to have it shipped by road directly. It pretty much blocks one direction of traffic on a divided highway. It will travel probably a 100 miles or so over land, and the rest by barge - down the east coast, and up the Mississippi River.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    5. Re:Cross country? by lexarius · · Score: 2

      Apparently tipping it more than a few degrees causes permanent damage. If you have to detour around very small hills, you might have to detour a very long way.

    6. Re:Cross country? by Nukenbar · · Score: 3, Informative

      Like most hung things, it is easier to take via water, even if the ground sea distance is much greater than a straight line approach.

      The majority of the trip will be via barge.

    7. Re:Cross country? by kobatan · · Score: 1

      It's going by barge for most of the journey. From the article: "It will float from New York Harbor in June, down the East Coast, around Florida, up the Gulf Coast and up the Mississippi River by July."

      --
      "Pulling together is the aim of despotism and tyranny. Free men pull in all kinds of directions." -TP
    8. Re:Cross country? by icebike · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Here's an Idea, why not move the Scientists? Greyhound bus.

      Or telecommute?

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    9. Re:Cross country? by jeffmeden · · Score: 2

      It's going by barge for most of the journey. From the article: "It will float from New York Harbor in June, down the East Coast, around Florida, up the Gulf Coast and up the Mississippi River by July."

      I got the barge part, but the Mississippi part was buried a bit further. I pictured a trip across the Great Lakes. Don't they know about the Erie Canal?

    10. Re:Cross country? by funky49 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Basically they are moving the instrument to a facility that can make a better stream of particles to steer into it.

      --
      --- rapper/producer/bachelorette party stripper
    11. Re:Cross country? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because they need the muon beam at fermi labs, and not the scientists.

    12. Re:Cross country? by jeffmeden · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Here's an Idea, why not move the Scientists? Greyhound bus.

      Or telecommute?

      They need to get *muons* into the ring, not the scientists. And Muons only survive on their own for 2 microseconds so even telecommuting is out of the question.

    13. Re:Cross country? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, in fact, it is going on spring break first. RTFA.

    14. Re:Cross country? by krlynch · · Score: 5, Informative

      We usually prefer airplanes to buses (lots cheaper, given the time value of money.....)

      The cost of running the experiment again at Brookhaven (which had been our initial idea) would be significantly higher than moving it to Fermilab, because of the cost of required accelerator upgrades at Brookhaven. Fermilab has protons to spare, and the experiment fits into the larger muon program at the Lab. http://www.fnal.gov/pub/science/experiments/intensity/

    15. Re:Cross country? by peragrin · · Score: 1

      Um at 3,200 miles I bet it goes by ship up the St Lawrence around the channels and locks and docks in Chicago.

      That would br roughly that for range. and takes a lot of the traffic out .

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    16. Re:Cross country? by kobatan · · Score: 1

      I assume they ruled it out for one reason or another. I live in the UK. I don't have enough local knowledge to comment further sensibly.

      --
      "Pulling together is the aim of despotism and tyranny. Free men pull in all kinds of directions." -TP
    17. Re:Cross country? by peragrin · · Score: 2

      Up to the st Lawrence and it can dock in Chicago. That would actually be shorter and faster than the Mississippi As the river and locks would slow things down out on the great lakes themselves they can get up to full speed.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    18. Re:Cross country? by cusco · · Score: 2

      Why didn't they barge this through the Great Lakes instead of up the Mississippi? The only reason occurs to me is perhaps some spots on the Chicago River might have been too narrow where it passes under bridges, but even that seems unlikely.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    19. Re:Cross country? by gman003 · · Score: 4, Informative

      They're moving the magnet to a particle accelerator. It's already at one, and it generated some interesting findings, but the particle accelerator it's currently at is too weak to give a margin of error low enough to safely call it a discovery.

      Thus, they're moving it to a more powerful accelerator, since moving the accelerator to it is not exactly an option.

    20. Re:Cross country? by mpeskett · · Score: 2

      They're sure going to feel silly when they realise how easy it really was all along. Especially if they ever find out that some guy from the internet beat them to the punch on such an obvious idea.

    21. Re:Cross country? by krlynch · · Score: 4, Informative

      Both routes were considered, but I'm not sure why one was chosen over the other. Presumably input from the companies bidding on the contract had something to do with it.

    22. Re:Cross country? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As someone totally ignorant of this: why?

      Why is it easier to transport huge things via water, rather than ground.

      No doubt, having asked this question, the answer will be mind-numbingly obvious in retrospect.

    23. Re:Cross country? by bws111 · · Score: 1

      The Erie Canal is not used for commercial traffic very much anymore. 2008 was its busiest recent year, and there were only 42 shipments that year.

    24. Re: Cross country? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was shorter to go the St. Lawrence and that was plan A. After careful study, it was safer and cheaper to take the longer route...as long as there are no hurricanes...

    25. Re:Cross country? by bws111 · · Score: 3, Informative

      For starters, this thing weighs 600 tons. It would have to cross hundreds of bridges, most of which are probably not rated for 600 tons. And of course it is much wider than normal travel lanes and would move very slowly, creating a traffic nightmare. Then there is the can`t tilt more than a few degrees, which would make crossing mountains kind of hard.

    26. Re: Cross country? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      P.S. Either route the barge ride ends at the same point on the Illinois Waterway around Lemont.

    27. Re: Cross country? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Erie Canal locks were too narrow. Northern route would have to go through N. Atlantic and St. Lawrence Seaway. Average wave height in N. Atlantic larger than hugging coast. Also ended up 300k cheaper due to barge and tug requirements. Ends at same place...Lemont, IL. Shipping in June to beat peak hurricane months.

    28. Re:Cross country? by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      Then there is the can`t tilt more than a few degrees, which would make crossing mountains kind of hard.

      Not to mention oceans.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    29. Re: Cross country? by ebno-10db · · Score: 1

      Erie Canal locks were too narrow. Northern route would have to go through N. Atlantic and St. Lawrence Seaway. Average wave height in N. Atlantic larger than hugging coast. Also ended up 300k cheaper due to barge and tug requirements. Ends at same place...Lemont, IL. Shipping in June to beat peak hurricane months.

      Why the N. Atlantic. How about hugging the Canadian coast? As you can tell, many people here want to give up their jobs in electronics and software and become shipping agents.

    30. Re:Cross country? by shoor · · Score: 1

      That was my thought too (up the St Lawrence), but I read enough of the fine article to see that it's going down the Atlantic seaboard and then up the Mississippi. I understand going by water as much as possible, but why that route?

      --
      In theory, theory and practice are the same; in practice they're different. (Yogi Berra & A. Einstein)
    31. Re:Cross country? by mrvan · · Score: 3, Informative

      As sibling says, bridges and hills are a problem. Major waterways are generally constructed so that bridges are either really high (as in 30ft+) or have some part that can be opened.

      Anything that fits on a truck is easy to transport over land, but stuff that is significantly larger and can't be moved in parts is difficult over land. On the water, major ports and waterways are pretty wide. For example, the coast pilot linked a boatnerd.com [1] (who doesn't love that url) says for the mississipi - illinois waterway connection:

      (10) Mississippi River-Illinois Waterway-
      (11) depth, 9 feet (2.7);
      (12) width, 80 feet (24.38 meters);
      (13) length, 600 feet (182.88 meters);
      (14) vertical clearance 17 feet (5.18 meters);

      So, you can transport something that is roughly 20x150 meters. Some random internet site [2] says that "The standard barge is 195 feet long, 35 feet wide, and can be used to a 9-foot draft. Its capacity is 1500 tons. Some of the newer barges today are 290 feet by 50 feet, double the capacity of earlier barges." So, if we get one of them "newer barges', we can transport something that is 75 x 15 meters and weighs 3000 tonnes using equipment that is standard on the infrastructure.

      A random wiki quote [3] says that "In the United States, 80,000 pounds (36,287 kg) is the maximum allowable legal gross vehicle weight without a permit.". So, with standard equipment you can transport something on the ground up to 36 metric tons, or about 0.1 percent of what fits on the barge*. Of course, you *can* transport something bigger than that, but then you get into serious logistic operations with special equipment, road closures, etc etc, while the barge can just be loaded up and sail away.

      tl;dr: roads are made for fast and flexible transportation of relatively small amounts of cargo; shipping is made for slow transportation of bulk and large items.

      [1] http://www.boatnerd.com/facts-figures/cpgreat.htm
      [2] http://www.caria.org/barges_tugboats.html
      [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semi-trailer_truck

      *) I'm totally ignoring any possible short tonne, long tonne, metric tonne etc errors here, since that won't make a dent into a 3 orders of magnitude difference...

    32. Re:Cross country? by LoRdTAW · · Score: 4, Informative

      It is a lot easier to move 600 tons by barge than by land. The size and weight makes it impossible to go over bridges and most roads. Not only is the weight highly concentrated, 1.2 million pounds for the magnet and probably another 300,000+ for the modular platform trailers & tractor but the width is nearly 50 feet. At that weight your speed is severely limited, always below 5 mph and you are limited to moving at night only. From the map, I would guess it might make its way south on floyd then onto a barge in the bay. I don't see how they could get it anywhere on the north shore unless they go up floyd to 25 and take lilco rd to use the docks at the power station (if it fits up those roads). From there its an easy trip on water. No bridges, narrow roads or worries about weight. Its open water until the Mississippi.

      You also have to take into account the cost and process to apply for permits. You have to plan the route in advance and have it approved by the DOT. By law you need a police escort for a load that large in NY, more money. Imagine planning a route for hundreds of miles involving police escorts, road closures, moving only at night, slow speeds and having to deal with routing around bridges (if possible) and maybe needing to reinforce bridges/overpasses. It can and has been done many times but its costly and time consuming. It can take upward of a year or more to plan a move that big.

    33. Re:Cross country? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The best part is you wouldn't need to anchor down the magnet on a ship, it would stick to it like a fridge magnet :-)

    34. Re:Cross country? by cheater512 · · Score: 2

      I imagine calm sea waves don't actually do much to a large barge with 600 tons on it.

    35. Re:Cross country? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tell that to Gordon Freeman.

    36. Re:Cross country? by the_other_chewey · · Score: 1

      I imagine calm sea waves don't actually do much to a large barge with 600 tons on it.

      A 600-ton barge isn't large.

    37. Re:Cross country? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why move anything when you can quantum teleport it through a tunnel.

    38. Re:Cross country? by cheater512 · · Score: 1

      Large as in size not weight.

    39. Re:Cross country? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'd suspect there are more places you could safely harbor the barge along the East Coast going south and around Florida then there are going north and up through the Great Lakes. A storm comes on one route, you don't have to far to go. But if you were try to cut across any of the Great Lakes and squall front comes through, then you're pretty much screwed. It gets rough out there and finding a harbor with enough room to pull into on short notice might be tricky. Also on the Great Lakes, a storm front usually has more effect on the maritime condition. (You get the weather equivalent of sloshing back and forth in a bathtub. As where in the ocean those things dissipate out a bit.)

    40. Re:Cross country? by NixieBunny · · Score: 1

      My radio observatory is about to have a 12 meter telescope antenna transported from central New Mexico to western Arizona. They have the same problem, but I imagine the saving grace is that the southwestern desert doesn't care if freeway traffic is blocked for an hour.

      --
      The determined Real Programmer can write Fortran programs in any language.
    41. Re:Cross country? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is a lot easier to move 600 tons by barge than by land.

      While your comment is completely true and informative... it isn't particularly relevant to the question of why they chose one of two different water routes.

    42. Re:Cross country? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      I asked the head of Emmert (the shipping company) this question a few weeks ago. From that brief conversation, it is my understanding that the Southern/Mississippi route was chosen despite the longer distance for safety reasons, which is the primary concern. The claim was that they could hug the coast and pull into safe harbor in the event of inclement conditions, while the Northern route up the St. Lawrence, etc. has stretches where the barge would not have that option and was, therefore, riskier.

    43. Re: Cross country? by guruevi · · Score: 1

      I live near the Erie Canal. You can't get something that big through it. It barely fits a passenger your boat at some points. I know at least a couple of locations in a 50 mile stretch where it would get stuck in the area.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    44. Re:Cross country? by sociocapitalist · · Score: 1

      FTA: "The Muon g-2 ring, an electromagnet made of steel and aluminum, begins its 3,200-mile trek from New York in early June. From there, it will sail by barge down the East Coast, around Florida's tip into the Gulf of Mexico, then up the Mississippi River until it arrives in Illinois."

      So just in time for hurricane season http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Atlantic_hurricane_season

      --
      blindly antisocialist = antisocial
    45. Re:Cross country? by sudon't · · Score: 1

      Bridge ratings are per axle weight, usually 34,000 lbs. They simply add wheels to spread out the load. You'll often see, (at least, as a truck driver, I often see), relatively small but very heavy loads on a rig that is much longer than appears to be needed. That's done in order to spread the weight over many axles. I don't think this load's gonna hit "hundreds" of bridges anyway. Most of the journey will be by sea, and Illinois is pretty flat. The interstates they will use typically go under the secondary roads, rather than over them.

      --
      -- sudon't

      Air-ride Equipped

    46. Re:Cross country? by smooth+wombat · · Score: 1

      Are you stupid? The person gave a perfectly reasonable explanation to why they are doing this by barge than by land.

      You just have to realize the person answering is an engineer.

      --
      We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
    47. Re:Cross country? by bws111 · · Score: 1

      The question was why ship on water instead of overland. I answered that - if you are shipping overland you are going to cross hundreds of bridges. As to the weight limit - a normal tractor trailer is limited to 20 tons on 4 axles, right? This thing is 30x that weight. 120 axles is no longer a truck, it is a train. My guess is that the route from where it docks to where it is installed is chosen to cross no bridges.

    48. Re:Cross country? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But the port on the des plaines river is another 15-20 miles closer to fermilab than lake michigan. 50% closer. Since they are closing major freeways for the move maybe the prospect of closing downtown chicago freeways for a night or two lost out. The land travel appears to be the most difficult part and thus what needed to be optimized.

    49. Re:Cross country? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you stupid? The person gave a perfectly reasonable explanation to why they are doing this by barge than by land.

      The poster you answered to isn't the one who is stupid. Let me recap the relevant bits of thread:

      1) cusco asked "hey why did they pick water route A instead of water route B?"

      2) LoRdTAW said "they picked water route A because going by land would have problems"

      3) AC said "um, that wasn't the question"

    50. Re:Cross country? by LoRdTAW · · Score: 1

      I looked through the comments and the articles and I think the question I answered was based on inside information. Nowhere did I read in any of the articles that there were two possible routes considered, only down the coast and up the Mississippi. There is this snippet from the PopSci article: "He didnt seem fazed at all by the prospect of getting the huge muon ring from New York to northern Illinois. We have the Great Lakes and the Mississippi, after all." notice how he said Great Lakes, lakes being plural which includes Huron and Erie which happen to provide a waterway between western NY or PA and IL.

      If you read both those sentences and the question asked it sounds like this: Why didn't we move the magnet through NY/PA to the great lakes and barge it to IL? It makes perfect sense because even if the magnet is moved through the Chicago river to Lake Michigan, it still needs to go up the Mississippi which is fed by the Chicago river. And going a bit up north on Michigan means they are travelling on one of the great lakes.

    51. Re:Cross country? by QuantumBeep · · Score: 1

      The problem with a large barge with a radio antenna on it is that it could charge up a discharge,

    52. Re:Cross country? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      There are no mountains on the ocean (other than islands, and you can steer a ship).

  4. They aren't. by fisted · · Score: 1

    It's just that You Can't Explain That.

    1. Re:They aren't. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The OP said "they're magic," that's what my sister said when her grandson asked her how computers work. Actually you can explain it. Whether or not you're smart enough to understand the explanation is another matter.

      If indeed you can't understand electricity and magnetism, maybe slashdot isn't the site for you?

    2. Re: They aren't. by Modern+Primate · · Score: 1

      What if you don't understand humor? Is Slashdot the right site for you then?

  5. By Train? by ggraham412 · · Score: 2

    Maglev train, of course!

  6. UPS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    UPS and lots of bubble wrap!

  7. Boat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    3200 miles? Boat around florida and up the mississippi.

  8. How do you transport a 600-ton magnet... by Jaegs · · Score: 1

    By using another 600-ton magnet, flipped around, of course.

  9. One word: by bradgoodman · · Score: 1
    Amtrak!

    (Too soon??)

  10. Cover it with a tarp... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Cover the thing with a tarp, and you've got a mysterious huge disc-shaped object being trucked around escorted by police... Can't wait to see the alien conspiracy sites light up!

  11. If they can deliver this safely.... by mark-t · · Score: 1

    ... then I can see absolutely no reason that a package that is clearly marked fragile, and probably nowhere near as fragile as this monstrosity, should be mishandled in transit *EVER* again.

    I hope they pull this off.

    I look forward to an age where couriers can actually be relied upon to deliver such goods without subjecting them to g forces beyond what their structural integrity can withstand.

    1. Re:If they can deliver this safely.... by Nidi62 · · Score: 2

      ... then I can see absolutely no reason that a package that is clearly marked fragile, and probably nowhere near as fragile as this monstrosity, should be mishandled in transit *EVER* again.

      I hope they pull this off.

      I look forward to an age where couriers can actually be relied upon to deliver such goods without subjecting them to g forces beyond what their structural integrity can withstand.

      I think most couriers/handlers see "fragile" more as a challenge than as a warning. You know, see how far it can bend before it will break, that kind of thing.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    2. Re:If they can deliver this safely.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I look forward to an age where couriers can actually be relied upon to deliver such goods without subjecting them to g forces beyond what their structural integrity can withstand.

      They can!

      You just have to be willing to pay $2-3 million for the trip.

    3. Re:If they can deliver this safely.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure if you use whatever shipping company they are using your fragile package will arrive safely.
      You'll probably have to pay a bit more than when using USPS or similar.

    4. Re:If they can deliver this safely.... by Nemyst · · Score: 1

      I'm sure if you pay the same price they do to ship your fragile package it'd arrive in pristine condition too.

    5. Re:If they can deliver this safely.... by KGIII · · Score: 3, Informative

      I'd not be surprised if they were using the Gimbaldi family. They do a good job actually and move a lot of the more famous things. They have some neat rigs and custom moving equipment that they've developed over the years.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  12. Wonder what they collected? by QuasiRob · · Score: 3, Funny

    By the time it arrived I wonder if it was covered in bits of wire, steel cans, bikes. screws and other random bits of iron.

    --
    If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done?
    1. Re:Wonder what they collected? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you watch out buddy, this thing will pull cars over from the other side of the highway!

    2. Re:Wonder what they collected? by PPH · · Score: 3, Funny

      Why are all these people tailgating me?

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
  13. Missed opportunity by Experiment+626 · · Score: 1

    This would have made for an awesome episode of "Shipping Wars".

    1. Re:Missed opportunity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No need to ship it, that is outdated thinking.
      Just 3-D print it where you want it to be.

  14. It's not a magnet by hawguy · · Score: 3, Informative

    It's not a magnet, it's an electromagnet, which just makes it a large and sensitive piece of equipment rather than a big magnet.

    When I saw the headline and summary, I thought they were going to have to take special precautions to stay away from metals and other materials that could be affected by the huge magnet.

    1. Re:It's not a magnet by hawguy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I bet you suck dicks.

      I do, sometimes. Though I'm sure why that's relevant?

    2. Re:It's not a magnet by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      It's not a magnet, it's an electromagnet, which just makes it a large and sensitive piece of equipment rather than a big magnet.

      Well, hey, then they can just levitate the sucker.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
  15. Move the people... by reg · · Score: 1

    Wouldn't it be cheaper to move the people and the money? 90% of the time the people involved don't even have to be near the machine, with this newfangled internet thing that some people invented...

    1. Re:Move the people... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because then they are in the exact same situation they are in now?
      This is why the internet sucks.
      You ask how can I do this.
      And instead of people just saying "no you can't", or "like this", people go on about doing it some other way that isn't at all what you wanted.
      Maybe I actually though about what I wanted before hand, and there's a reason I'm asking how to do it in this specific way.

    2. Re:Move the people... by krlynch · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As I mentioned up above, it turns out to be loads cheaper to move the experiment to Fermilab than to upgrade the accelerator complex at Brookhaven to do the experiment there.

    3. Re:Move the people... by Entropius · · Score: 2

      Because there is a lot of very, very expensive equipment at Fermilab already. As big of a deal as this thing is, the stuff that is already there is far more pricey and extensive. Physicists are easy to move; their equipment isn't.

  16. Why is it so fragile? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's a big electro magnet. Why can tilting it a couple of degrees break it?
    The article doesn't say as far as I can tell, so I can only assume it's because it was built from crappy parts, or assembled by idiots.

    1. Re:Why is it so fragile? by cffrost · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's a big electro magnet. Why can tilting it a couple of degrees break it?
      The article doesn't say as far as I can tell, so I can only assume it's because it was built from crappy parts, or assembled by idiots.

      It could be a Bitter electromagnet, which are constructed from thin disks of porous copper.

      --
      Thank you, Edward Snowden.

      "Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
    2. Re:Why is it so fragile? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks.

    3. Re:Why is it so fragile? by krlynch · · Score: 5, Informative

      Well, we might be idiots, but that's not the problem. It's a set of three very large superconducting coils, custom wound on-site in the 1990s, built into cryostats that can't be disassembled, and being moved as a set of monolithic units. They were never designed or intended to be moved, and significant engineering work has gone into determining the mechanical loads they can be safely subjected to.

    4. Re:Why is it so fragile? by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      Well, we might be idiots, but that's not the problem. It's a set of three very large superconducting coils, custom wound on-site in the 1990s, built into cryostats that can't be disassembled, and being moved as a set of monolithic units. They were never designed or intended to be moved, and significant engineering work has gone into determining the mechanical loads they can be safely subjected to.

      How much would it cost to build another one at say, Fermilab?

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    5. Re:Why is it so fragile? by Herkum01 · · Score: 4, Informative

      If you read the article, it says that shipping is 1/50 of the cost of building a new one.

    6. Re:Why is it so fragile? by gmhowell · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well, we might be idiots, but that's not the problem. It's a set of three very large superconducting coils, custom wound on-site in the 1990s, built into cryostats that can't be disassembled, and being moved as a set of monolithic units. They were never designed or intended to be moved, and significant engineering work has gone into determining the mechanical loads they can be safely subjected to.

      How much would it cost to build another one at say, Fermilab?

      Here's a hint: that information is in the article.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    7. Re:Why is it so fragile? by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      but is that pre-paid or C.O.D.?

    8. Re:Why is it so fragile? by SleazyRidr · · Score: 1

      Let's look at the two possible options here:
      1) The guys who built Fermilab don't actually know anything about physics
      2) You are not actually an expert on magnets
      Which seems more likely?

  17. good old skool karma whoring! by Thud457 · · Score: 2

    That? Oh, that's a, err, pizza!

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  18. makes me feel really old by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was BNH(ell) when the g-2 magnet was first installed. I wonder if the FNAL part of the magnets life will be as inconclusive as it has been so far.
     

  19. can you knock out the ez-pass scanners with this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    can you knock out the ez-pass scanners with this?

  20. No tilt.. so lets move it over the ocean? by boaworm · · Score: 4, Interesting

    >> The trip will be tense, because the ring’s massive electromagnet cannot tilt or twist more than a few degrees, or the wiring inside will be irreparably damaged. It will float from New York Harbor in June, down the East Coast, around Florida, up the Gulf Coast and up the Mississippi River by July.

    That seems rather risky. Most ships would at one point or another tilt more than a few degrees to either side due to .. waves. No mention on if this is a gyro-stabilized barge perhaps...

    --
    Probable impossibilities are to be preferred to improbable possibilities.
    Aristotele
    1. Re:No tilt.. so lets move it over the ocean? by mrmeval · · Score: 1

      Ask them. I assume it's some sort of stabilized platform inside. I'm sure such specialty devices have been made in the past and they'd make a custom interior for that device.

      --
      I'd go on a Vegan diet but the delivery time from Vega is too long. --brownkitty
    2. Re: No tilt.. so lets move it over the ocean? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As with most science on the news, this is a greatly simplified description. There are hard specs on how much the rings can flex. There are hard specs on how many g's of force are allowed horizontally and vertically. The ring has been stabilized mechanically to withstand the voyage on fairly rough seas. It will be outfitted with accelerometers read remotely to determine ahead of time if it should head to safe harbor.

    3. Re:No tilt.. so lets move it over the ocean? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >> electromagnet cannot tilt or twist more than a few degrees
      >> Most ships would at one point or another tilt more than a few degrees

      I believe he meant this in relationship to the structure of the device itself. As in, this 15m magnet cannot be allowed to bend or twist. It probably doesn't care in the least what angle it is in relative to gravity.

    4. Re:No tilt.. so lets move it over the ocean? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Or maybe they're going to suspend it from a rope. High tech, I know.

      Being landlubbers by birth, we tend to think of the surface of this planet as a hard plane. It's not, and gravity makes damn sure you get reminded of it from time to time.

    5. Re:No tilt.. so lets move it over the ocean? by flatbedexpress · · Score: 2

      Transporting on land will be the easy part. They will use a Goldhofer trailer that has hydraulic leveling axles that will keep the entire deck of the trailer flat and level. But, if it was my equipment, I would make sure their is a large gap from the trailer to the actual magnets so it doesn't affect my control systems for steering the trailer. For the barge, odd are that they will leave the magnet on the Goldhofer trailer. That way, the trailer can keep it from twisting and tilting if the barge does.

    6. Re:No tilt.. so lets move it over the ocean? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That seems right. I think someone much earlier in the discussion thread erred in saying "tilt or twist". The description I read describing what damage would be done if that happened clearly pointed to "bend or twist" as being the correct statement.

    7. Re:No tilt.. so lets move it over the ocean? by Entropius · · Score: 1

      It's an electromagnet, so nothing interesting happens unless it's got a whopping big current in it.

  21. Saint Lawrence Seaway by matthelm007 · · Score: 1

    Wouldn't it be much shorter all around to go by the Saint Lawrence Seaway? Shorter on the water and shorter distance in Illinois???

    1. Re:Saint Lawrence Seaway by istartedi · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Due to the aforementioned tilting problem, the North Atlantic is a bad idea. Too many swells. Going south allows them to use the Intracoastal Waterways

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    2. Re:Saint Lawrence Seaway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Clearly this valuable piece of Federal-built equipment needs to be kept away from possible Canadian terrorists!

  22. I Know I'm Stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I know I'm stupid but, it seems to me that anything that big and that delicate should be built in situ.

    It can't twist more than a few degrees and they're going to put it on a rolling barge for almost a month. What could possibly go wrong?

    1. Re:I Know I'm Stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it was built and meant to be used in new york. they got to the point that they can't advance any further without a bigger accelerator...well Fermi has a bigger accelerator to feed this thing, and it is about 1/50th the cost to ship it than it is to build a new one, and a bigger accelerator is similarly expensive, so they decided to try moving it.

  23. Not that tough by Animats · · Score: 1

    It's not really that tough a job. The thing is about 4 lanes wide, and not excessively tall. There's less than 20 miles of road movement at each end of the trip. So it's going to be a routine big move with brief road closures. Probably late at night.

    The rest of the trip is by barge, down the East Coast, around Florida, and up the Mississippi, Illinois, and DesPlanes rivers to Chicago. There are standard barges which can easily handle something of that size. The locks on that route have 110 foot width.

    1. Re:Not that tough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      , around Florida

      Just as they're heading into hurricane season...

  24. Storage ring, right... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    That's just a cover story. They're really moving the Stargate.

  25. Simple by HtR · · Score: 2

    If you turn it on, you should be able to just pull it along behind a train, assuming the tracks could be electrified as needed (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maglev for details if necessary).
    Then again, if this "superconductor" really has super powers as its name implies, it should be able to fly.

    --
    Have you tried turning it off and on again?
  26. Great Lakes by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 2

    Makes you wonder what's wrong with the Great Lakes route which is presumably much shorter.

    1. Re:Great Lakes by crontabminusell · · Score: 1

      Makes you wonder what's wrong with the Great Lakes route which is presumably much shorter.

      My guess would be the waves on the lake are too choppy to keep the magnet ring level. The waves are far choppier (higher frequency) on the Great Lakes than they are in the ocean.

    2. Re:Great Lakes by blackraven14250 · · Score: 1

      It's on Long Island, which means you'd have to cross through NYC in order to get it out to Upstate New York by road. That alone might be impossible - I'm not sure you'd be able to drive it past a certain point on the island, you wouldn't make it to Manhattan, and by the time you're loading it on a boat to get it across to Connecticut or Massachusetts, with an unload there and another loading at the lakes, it might just be cheaper and less error prone to ship it around to the Gulf.

    3. Re:Great Lakes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe it's too big to get throuhg the Welland Canal?

    4. Re:Great Lakes by frinkster · · Score: 1

      Makes you wonder what's wrong with the Great Lakes route which is presumably much shorter.

      To use the Great Lakes route (as they are currently used), the magnet would be required to go out into the open ocean, go around Cape Cod and the rest of Massachusetts, go around Nova Scotia and into the St Lawrence Seaway, which would then allow it to enter Lake Ontario, go through the Welland Canal into Lake Erie, and on and on to Chicago. The open ocean is what is going to kill it.

      The chosen route will almost certainly be through the intracoastal waterway which requires very little open ocean travel - and that can be planned for especially calm days.

      But alas, the real question is why the route does not involve the Erie Canal (which is still in operation!), which could certainly accommodate something of this size. They could head up the Hudson River to Albany and then take the canal to Buffalo on Lake Erie, bypassing the ocean altogether. Perhaps they really are concerned about the waves in the Great Lakes.

    5. Re:Great Lakes by bws111 · · Score: 1

      The locks on the Erie Canal can handle a vessel 43.5 feet wide. The magnet is around 49 feet wide. In addition, there is only 15 feet of bridge clearance (not sure if that is a problem or not).

  27. High Energy Physics by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 2

    And Muons only survive on their own for 2 microseconds

    That's easy to fix - boost them to ~260 GeV and they will last long enough to make a 1,600 km journey. It's the 1,600 km of vacuum pipe and focussing magnets that is the real problem.

    1. Re:High Energy Physics by noobermin · · Score: 1

      lol.
      This is slashdot, but not many people will understand this joke.

    2. Re:High Energy Physics by Noughmad · · Score: 1

      What joke? Due to relativistic time dilation, if they are moving faster, their observed lifetime in our system of reference will be longer.

      --
      PlusFive Slashdot reader for Android. Can post comments.
  28. F$&%ING MAGNETS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How do they transport?

  29. I remember the old 16mm movies of the Hale mirror by Virtucon · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I remember back in Elementary school watching the Hale telescope mirror movie. One of those old 16mm, rainy day, hell the teacher has to have a cigarette break flicks? Old black and white footage is available here: http://archive.org/details/capsca_00001

    Anyway, when they shipped the blank out to Caltech by Train it was put in a steel case. The Blank was then polished at Caltech to make the 200" mirror for the telescope and that was shipped via truck to Palomar Mountain. Anyway, they put it in a special casing for shipment and when they arrived at Palomar, they found bullet holes in the casing. Even back then, the local Luddites just wanted to spoil the fun. Anyway, my point is here that if they could ship a 200 inch mirror in the early part of the 20th century, they should be able to easily transport a 15mm magnet that's hollow in the middle.

    --
    Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
  30. meters? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    15 meters = 49.2 feet. Not everyone uses meters.

  31. Muons and speed of light by ModernGeek · · Score: 1

    The article mentions muons traveling at the speed of light. I think it's important to discern that they are moving /close/ to the speed of light, but not at the speed of light.

    --
    Sig: I stole this sig.
  32. There's a joke there, but I'm not touching it. by girlinatrainingbra · · Score: 1, Funny

    re: Like most hung things,...it is easier to take via water...

    There's a joke there, but I'm not touching it.

    .

    ... but I'm not touching it....

    That's what she said!

    Oh wait, I done goofed on myself if I were a guy. I musta got that joke meme wrong somehow... ;>)

  33. Need to move a ring? by PPH · · Score: 3, Funny

    Get a hobbit to do it. Its the only way.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:Need to move a ring? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously not recommended!
      Had a ring moved by a hobbit that one time. He brought in a group of "experts" (academic types, fellowship and such). But he lost the ring when traversing a volcano or something. It ended in a real mess for me and caused my project to fail.

  34. Coyote Road Services by tengu1sd · · Score: 3, Funny

    At Coyote Road Services we specialize in creative uses for powerful magnets. Over the years, our company has coordinated many road closures and infrastructure upgrades. The skilled technicians and engineers use top rated ACME equipment in our projects. Coyote Road Services, call and one of our agents will take you to lunch and go over your project plan.

  35. Let the magnet ride levitated using magnetic field by Codifex+Maximus · · Score: 1

    Hmm... it may be possible to create an electromagnet run off a mobile power supply that would put North to North or South to South so that the magnet would levitate off a surface and ride smoothly. Depends on configuration of the magnet though.

    --
    Codifex Maximus ~ In search of... a shorter sig.
  36. Consider the kids by Dahlgil · · Score: 1

    Has anyone considered how many scouts will go missing because of this?

  37. (Not) 600 Tons of Steel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just to clear up a misconception in the original posting and a number of the comments above, the coils being transported do not weigh 600 tons. They are closer to 6 tons. The entire super-ferric magnet weighs 600 tons, but most of that mass is in the iron return yoke, which has been disassembled and (probably) already trucked piecemeal to Fermilab. The transport problem for the superconducting coils and cryostat has never been one of weight, only size and tolerance to mechanical stress. In fact, at one point, the group had explored the possibility of transporting the coils part of the way by Sikorsky helicopter (see http://www.bnl.gov/newsroom/news.php?a=22567) but the ground clearance restrictions were not practicable. Also, it probably would have looked way too much like a UFO.