|
|
|
Details for Supported vs Hanging
| Property | Value |
| Name | Supported vs Hanging |
| Description | One of the most
difficult tradeoffs in the design of PRT systems is the choice between use of
supported or hanging vehicles, i.e., Supported-Vehicle Systems (SVS) or
Hanging-Vehicle Systems (HVS). The
DEMAG+MBB group solved this
problem by developing a guideway that permits one set of vehicles to ride above
the guideway and another set that ride below.
In my textbook
I examined the tradeoff between systems using one-way guideways and two-way,
above-below guideways, and found that the cost per passenger-mile of the
one-way system was somewhat lower. The
two-way system reduces circuity
while riding the system, but to make the use of larger, two-way guideways
economical the lines must be spread farther apart, which results in longer
walking distances, which add more to the trip time than the two-way system reduces
it. Moreover, walking is weighted in
ridership studies much greater than riding.
The two-way guideway had about twice the bulk of the one-way guideway, which
increases visual impact and cost. I
thus concluded that it is better to concentrate on one-way-guideway systems and
then compare SVS vs. HVS in every way we can.
|
| Filename | Supported vs. Hanging Vehicles.pdf |
| Filesize | 131.4 kB |
| Filetype | pdf (Mime Type: application/pdf) |
| Creator | admin |
| Created On: |
04/07/2008 16:19 |
| Viewers | Everybody |
| Maintained by | Editor |
| Hits | 87 Hits |
| Last updated on |
07/18/2008 19:41 |
| Homepage | |
| CRC Checksum | |
| MD5 Checksum | |
|
