Slashdot Mirror


Ask Slashdot: What Would Happen If a Hyperloop Train Failed?

dryriver writes: I've been following Elon Musk's Hyperloop initiative with great interest. The idea of getting from one city to another at 700 MPH without having to suffer through an airport and all that jazz is revolutionary. I'm glad that somebody is trying to innovate in the area of land travel. My question though: When conventional trains going at much slower speeds derail or crash, the result is often serious injuries or deaths. What happens if something goes wrong with a 700 MPH Hyperloop train/pod or with part of the track? Would a Hyperloop accident at that speed even be survivable?

32 of 736 comments (clear)

  1. That's easy, it would get a participation trophy by CajunArson · · Score: 4, Funny

    This is the 21st century you white cisgendered Trumpist-pig.

    There's no such thing as "failure" and the HyperLoop would simply get a participation trophy and be placed in the protected trans-functional class where you can't criticize it.

    --
    AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
  2. simple by ganjadude · · Score: 5, Informative

    you will die. really no ifs ands or buts about it.

    --
    have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
  3. Re:Soft failure possible too by Joviex · · Score: 4, Funny

    Similarly, what if the vacuum failed and the pod stopped in a low pressure section pipe in the middle of nowhere. The only way out if to wait for someone to figure out the exact location of the pod and cut you out. I've yet to see an estimate for how many hours (days?) you might be stuck in there in pitch blackness, likely getting cooked inside a metal tube sitting in the sun.

    Its this new fangled technology they call a HATCH DOOR every XYZ meters.

    Crazy tech.

  4. Trains are not strongly attached to the rail... by JcMorin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Trains derail because of a century-old standard makes them very badly attached to its rail. If you run into a tube, even if the tube cracks a bit, there is a good chance you still continue in the same direction the same way I can run peas in a straw with crack. I don't think catastrophic can't occur. I just think it's inherently more secure to run in a 360 degrees boundary tube than 2 littles track with no grip else than your own weight.

  5. More idiotic scare-mongering by SuperKendall · · Score: 5, Informative

    IF the system started to have a slow leak the pod would have time to slow, air resistance would do it naturally if nothing else.

    Also it's not like it cannot have basically "landing gear" that would be able to slow the pod from 700 MPH in the perfectly smooth sealed tube in the case that a real breach presented itself - but you do all realize that a pressure breach would not be instantaneous across the enter length of the tube, right? Then we are back to the case where pressure changes can be reacted to and the system brought to a gradual halt.

    I sweat Slashdot has become a bastion of luddite nut-jobs, who seem to purposefully ignore physics. Shameful to see such a virulent example of this on the home page.

    You all sound like the people who wouldn't get into the first automobiles... or modern day Amish who still will not, but at least the Amish people are generally useful.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  6. Even More Simple by ranton · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We don't know what will happen because it hasn't been engineered and built yet. Determining how it handles various types of failures will certainly be part of the engineering process. Worst case scenario is everyone dies, which isn't much different than a plane crash. But just like with a plane, plenty of fail safes will be there to allow for managed failures. Most catastrophic failures will probably just cause the train to come to a gradual halt.

    --
    -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
    1. Re:Even More Simple by gfxguy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Agreed... just like plane crashes, it could be catastrophically bad, but also just like plane crashes, it would probably be so rare that it's still safer than driving.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    2. Re:Even More Simple by DaHat · · Score: 4, Interesting

      An airplane can glide quite some distance without power. It can even be controlled during this phase.

      If a hyperloop tube suffers a catastrophic breach, think of the pressure wave of air rushing in and what that will do to any near by vehicle. Now, what happens to the vehicles in front of the one that just became a bullet in a gun?

    3. Re:Even More Simple by Kiuas · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Worst case scenario is everyone dies, which isn't much different than a plane crash.

      There's a notable difference to plane crashes though: failures of the tube or even a singular capsule will halt all traffic on the route, potentially for an extended period of time if pressurisation of tube tube fails due to the tube itself being damaged.

      --
      "It is the business of the future to be dangerous" -Alfred North Whitehead
    4. Re:Even More Simple by MightyYar · · Score: 4, Informative

      think of the pressure wave of air rushing in and what that will do to any near by vehicle

      There are engineering solutions to that - the most obvious would be emergency vents that open up in the event that pressure is lost in any part of the tube. You can also make the tube larger than it needs to be to let air circulate around the car (like in a regular subway) rather than pushing it like a piston through a tight cylinder. Even a total vacuum is only 1 atm, 14lbs sq in, or 100 kPa lower than ambient - so it's not like we're developing pressures beyond what large brakes could not overcome.

      My critique is that the engineering solutions are all going to be complex, expensive and make the thing a white elephant - but it's completely feasible from a technical standpoint.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    5. Re:Even More Simple by Ami+Ganguli · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A containment failure doesn't need to implode - it can just leak. Depends on the materials and the details of the design. And if it leaks, then everything slows down and stops.

      I can't imagine they'd build this thing without any sort of safe failure mode.

      --
      It is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail. - Abraham Maslow
    6. Re:Even More Simple by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 5, Funny

      Maybe he thinks the hyperloop walls are made of the same material as party balloons.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    7. Re:Even More Simple by bws111 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Huh? The pressure difference, if they manage to make a perfect vacuum, is 1 atmosphere, about 15PSI. Pretty sure regular old steel can handle that. Natural gas in pumped through pipelines at about 250PSI, and a leak does not cause the entire pipeline to catastrophically fail.

    8. Re:Even More Simple by Guspaz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If the largest concern in a failure is "people will be delayed" instead of "people will die", I think that's a pretty successful disaster mitigation strategy.

    9. Re:Even More Simple by iserlohn · · Score: 4, Informative

      Do you know how much kinetic energy a moving trainset has at 200mph, let alone 700mph? If there is an accident, that energy has to go somewhere, and wherever it goes, it will have the potential to do something that will kill people.

    10. Re:Even More Simple by bws111 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There is not 'a lot more pressure' outside than inside. IF they managed to create a perfect vacuum, the pressure difference would be about 15PSI. There are tons of materials that can handle that puny pressure difference. For comparison, natural gas is pumped through pipelines at about 250PSI. A leak does not cause a catastophic failure of the pipeline.

    11. Re:Even More Simple by MightyYar · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Tanker cars are designed to keep the contents inside, not contain a vacuum. The forces are literally the opposite of what was designed. You might as well claim that the pyramids are a poor design because they'd fly apart if turned on their side.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    12. Re:Even More Simple by Solandri · · Score: 5, Interesting

      We know exactly what will happen. The problem isn't the tube losing its pressure seal. Air is compressible, so it makes a great shock absorber (in fact that is exactly how some shock absorbers are designed - with a gas at one end of a cylinder being pressurized).

      The problem is trains moving at high speed tends to do bad things when they hit a stationary solid object. The Eschede derailment probably would've only had a dozen or so fatalities due to losing a wheel at 200 kph. In fact, the wheel failure was in the first car, but the engine and first four cars survived relatively intact, scraping the bridge supports but coasting to a stop or derailing and hitting some trees (the guy sitting above the wheel which failed survived despite being out of seat showing the wheel to the conductor when the accident happened). The bridge collapsed onto the 5th car, causing the rapid deceleration of all subsequent cars. That's where all the fatalities occurred. It was just bad luck the train happened to be passing underneath a bridge just as the accident occurred.

      Now, consider that with a hyperloop train, the cars will be traveling at speed a few inches from the stationary wall for the entire length of the track. It's not an air leak you need to worry about. It's an IED-type device placed on the side of the track wall, designed to blow it inwards just before the train arrives. At 700 MPH the explosive only needs enough energy to blow enough of the wall inwards to destroy the first train car causing it to block the subsequent cars. The kinetic energy of the train itself will then be more than sufficient to destroy it. When US Air 427 hit the ground at just 300 MPH, its kinetic energy was enough to shred all the metal into pieces smaller than a sheet of paper. United 93 hit the ground at 563 MPH, and its kinetic energy fragmented the plane into such small pieces that conspiracy theorists (who can't seem to grasp the notion that solid metal will fragment when presented with no other means of shedding kinetic energy) have gone nuts with theories that no plane actually crashed there.

      A hyperloop train is going to have more than 4x the kinetic energy per unit mass of US Air 427, 1.5x that of United 93. If one strikes the wall and crashes, it kinetic energy is literally going to turn it (and its occupants) into confetti.

      What makes it more dangerous than a plane is that planes fly miles away from the nearest solid object when they're at top speed (mid-air collisions excepted). Even systems designed to cause a deliberate collision (surface to air missiles) have a high failure rate. OTOH Hyperloop is going to be traveling a few inches from the nearest stationary object the entire length of its trip. So you're now faced with the prospect of protecting the entire length of track from vandalism or terrorism.

    13. Re:Even More Simple by jeremyp · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What do you mean by a containment failure? The tube is going to have a near vacuum in it so it has to be built to withstand a pressure difference of only one atmosphere. That's like a submarine diving to 10 metres. I think we can manage that.

      I think it's much more likely that the tube will develop a leak. When a train traveling at 700 mph hits the air, it's going to slow down, probably quite rapidly. I couldn't begin to tell you how that will pan out. It may be that it is not a big deal because there probably won't be a wall of air so much as a pressure gradient.

      --
      All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
    14. Re:Even More Simple by thegarbz · · Score: 4, Informative

      Vacuum expansion joints are a thing. In those scenarios that awesome* force of vacuum gets contained by .... a small flexible polymer.

      *Vacuum isn't an awesome force.

    15. Re:Even More Simple by sdinfoserv · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't buy it. The average cruising speed of a jet is (c) 525 miles per hour. Plane crashes are not survivable when the plane is going at cruising speed. Survival happens then the plan lands ungracefully at a landing speed, or (c) 150mph. Forced landings ie:, a plane hits something and is forced to turn around, or an in flight failure forces a landing. This is when survival happens.
      Assuming a hyperloop cruses at 700 mph or 25% faster, the notion of survive ability of virtually any crash, regardless of how the system is engineered, is ludicrous

    16. Re:Even More Simple by Immerman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Unless you actually blow up the tube, you won't get a "wall of air" like that. Not with any real pressure behind it anyway. (for comparison Martian winds are routinely several hundred miles per hour, and they hit with the force of a light breeze because there's not enough pressure to give them any momentum.)

      And if you're blowing up the tube, then you'll probably want to wait until a car's far too close to stop and slams into the wreckage at 700mph, so there's not much point in worrying about it. A terrorist attack killing a couple dozen people is trivially easy to pull off and basically impossible to defend against - every corner coffee shop offers a target that size, and is a lot easier to take out.

      For anything less severe, you stop - 700mph= 313m/s. 3 to 10g's of braking is eminently survivable, though some injuries may occur. And at 30-100m/s^2 it only takes 3-10 seconds to stop. You'll still travel a goodly portion of a kilometer in that time, but you're not actually going to get a lot of air through the leak that quickly either. And if you somehow *do* have a huge column of dense air rushing at you, can also open emergency hatches between you and it - you'll get buffeted a bit by the closer air that hasn't had time to build up speed, and the first air column will plow into a long column of slower-moving air, dissipating the energy far more gracefully as fresh jets of pressurized air out the emergency hatches.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
  7. FMEA by Thelasko · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Sounds like someone from a hyperloop startup wants Slashdot to do the FMEA for them.

    That's ok, I'm game to start one. First we need to define the hyperloop as a system.
    • Evacuated tube
    • Pressurized car
    • Propulsion system

    Next, we imagine, and list all of the possible failure modes for each one.

    • Evacuated tube-
      Rapid depressurization
    • Pressurized car-
      Rapid depressurization
    • Propulsion System-
      Thermal event
      Explosive event

    Then we discuss the effect of each failure mode, and steps that can be taken to mitigate it... Completing an FMEA usually takes hours in meetings with large numbers of engineers brainstorming all of the possibilities.

    --
    One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
  8. Plane crashes are seldom fatal by sjbe · · Score: 4, Informative

    Worst case scenario is everyone dies, which isn't much different than a plane crash.

    Evidently you aren't aware that 95.7% of surviving an accident in a plane. The vast majority of people actually do survive. When the National Transportation Safety Board studied accidents between 1983 and 2000 involving 53,487 passengers, they found that 51,207 survived.

    It's unclear what the statistics might be for hyperloop but assuming instant fiery death is probably not going to be correct for the majority of failure modes.

    1. Re:Plane crashes are seldom fatal by networkBoy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The mortality rate for national newsworthy and international newsworthy airplane accidents is near 100%, hence the cognitive disconnect.

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
  9. Re:About the same thing that happens with aircraft by Wycliffe · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Unlike a train or plane, a hyperloop is an enclosed tube where collisions *should* be non-existent unless you put multiple cars in the same tube. The most likely failure is likely stalling in which case you will need to have some way of extracting the stalled car but everyone should be uninjured. The mostly likely fatal failure would likely be a break in the tube causing a derailment and the closest we have to that would be roller coasters and large oil pipelines. Looking at the failure rate of large oil pipelines and roller coaster derailment should give a pretty good idea of the failure rate of a hyperloop.

  10. Re:Soft failure possible too by DaHat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Hatch doors... which would be separate failure points along the way for the pressure difference to be changed.

    Assume perfect seals and no malicious or accidental misuse of even a single hatch door. A tech team is sent out to to assist the passengers in getting out. You can't just open the hatch, you've 14.7 lbs of pressure per square inch trying to keep that door closed, assuming it swings out. Now you've got to pressurize either the entire system (so largely shutting it down), or the particular leg you are on. How long does this take? Now how long does it take to undo these steps?

    Short of a 9/11, when there is an airplane crash, even an entire airport (or state) is shut down due to weather, the rest of the system keeps going.

    This also aside from all of the issues related to thermal expansion & contraction of the materials, making the sealing even more difficult.

  11. Please think, even if just for a moment. by SuperKendall · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Air fills the vacuum at the speed of sound.

    Yes, exactly. Sound is not all that fast (six seconds to travel just a mile), mostly the pod would be so remote from the source of the leak it would have plenty of time to slow down to a reasonable speed before substantial pressure reached it. Also if we are talking about small leak its not like it would INSTANTLY be a huge volume of air in front of the pod, it would be a gradual loss of vacuum and therefore simply not the "wall of air" you are scare-mongering about.

    And of course, the leak would have to occur in front of a moving pod instead of behind it to even be that much of a potential danger...

    A wall of air hitting you at that speed would likely kill you.

    Not at 70MPH instead of 700MPH, you blithering retard.

    Also I've not seen any arguments for why emergency vacuum pumps placed along the tube would help eliminate the danger from common leaks? But you didn't even think that far you were just like YABBER YABBER YABBER FLOOM DOOM!! *throws hands in air and waves frantically like muppet on acid*

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  12. Re:About the same thing that happens with aircraft by Lab+Rat+Jason · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Actually, I suspect the most likely fatal failure is going to be loss of passenger pressurization, resulting in *loss of cargo*. Cabin depressurization of an airplane is bad, but still not as bad as being exposed to total vacuum, and a plane can dive to regain air pressure. When a hyperloop pod looses pressure, there's no place to run.

    --
    Which has more power: the hammer, or the anvil?
  13. Sabotage by emil · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Perhaps a more salient question is sabotage.

    Explosive charges attached to the tube that detonated five seconds before the arrival of a pod would likely kill everyone on board.

  14. Re:About the same thing that happens with aircraft by grub · · Score: 4, Funny

    Yes, but Earth is in constant orbit around the Sun. If the plane was close enough to the edge, it would simply go over and float down to one of the turtles.

    --
    Trolling is a art,
  15. Re:About the same thing that happens with aircraft by Guspaz · · Score: 5, Informative

    The whitepaper described how to handle loss of pressure in the pod. Basically it boiled down to this:

    1) If the leak is small enough, compensate with onboard emergency air supply until the destination is reached
    2) If the leak is big enough, initiate a system-wide emergency stop and rapidly repressurize the tube.

    You could arguably repressurize the tube faster than an aircraft could descend to a safe altitude.