Development of a Halbach Array Magnetic Levitation System Outline Outline Cont. Introduction Previous Work

Development of a Halbach Array Magnetic Levitation System Outline Outline Cont. Introduction Previous Work www.phwiki.com

Development of a Halbach Array Magnetic Levitation System Outline Outline Cont. Introduction Previous Work

Johnston, Betty, Freelance Columnist has reference to this Academic Journal, PHwiki organized this Journal Development of a Halbach Array Magnetic Levitation System By: Dirk DeDecker Jesse VanIseghem Advised by: Mr. Steven Gutschlag Dr. Winfred Anakwa Outline Introduction Previous Work Project Summary Changes to Original Proposal Physics of Halbach Array Magnets Preliminary Calculations in addition to Simulations Outline Cont. Equipment List Lab work Problems in addition to Solutions Results Future Projects Patents References Acknowledgements

Everest Institute-Bensalem PA www.phwiki.com

This Particular University is Related to this Particular Journal

Introduction Magnetic levitation technology can be used in high speed train applications Maglev suspension allows trains to accelerate to over 300 mph in addition to reduces maintenance by almost eliminating all moving parts Previous Work Dr. Sam Gurol in addition to Dr. Richard Post have worked on “The General Atomics Low Speed Urban Maglev Technology Development Program” utilizing the rotary track method Previous Work Cont. Work by Paul Friend in 2004 Levitation Equations Matlab GUI Work by Glenn Zomchek in 2007 Design of system using Inductrack method Successful levitation to .45 mm.

Previous Work – Results Inductrack results from Glenn Zomchek’s project (2007) Project Summary The goals of our project are: Develop an improved Halbach array magnetic levitation system to achieve 0.5 cm at a track speed of 10 m/s Demonstrate successful levitation Changes to Original Proposal Focused on demonstration of levitation of the magnet device Changed closed loop system to open loop

Physics of Halbach Array Magnets Designed by Klaus Halbach Creates a strong, enhanced magnetic field on one side, while almost cancelling the field on the opposite side Peak strength of the array: B0=Br(1-e-kd)sin(/M)/( /M) Tesla k = 2/, M = of magnets, Br = magnet strength, d = thickness of each magnet = Halbach array wavelength Physics of the Inductrack Halbach array moving at velocity v m/sec over inductrack generates flux 0sin(t), 0 Tesla-m2, linking the circuit = (2/)v rad/sec Voltage induced in inductrack circuit: V(t) = 0cos(t) Inductrack R-L circuit current equation: V(t) = Ldi(t)/dt + Ri(t) Physics of the Inductrack Cont Close-packed conductors, made utilizing thin aluminum or copper sheets Allows as long as levitation at low speeds Can be modeled as an RL circuit Transfer function has pole at -R/L

Physics of the Inductrack Cont. Dr. Post used the induced current in addition to magnetic field to derive Lift as long as ce: = Bo2w2/2kL1/1+(R/L)2e-ky1 Drag as long as ce: = Bo2w2/2kL (R/L) /1+(R/L)2e-ky1 Where y1 is the levitation height in meters Physics of the Inductrack Cont. Phase shift relates to drag in addition to levitation as long as ces Lift/Drag = L/R L = 0 w/(2kdc) , where dc is the center to center spacing of conducting strips in addition to w is the track width Physics of the Maglev System Force needed to levitate: F = m9.81 Newtons m=.465 kg F = 4.56 N Breakpoint velocity: By solving Lift/Drag as long as v, vb=/(2) m/sec

Simulation with Matlab GUI Equipment List 9” radius polyethylene wheel, with a width of 2” 57”x2”x1/4” copper sheet of thin conducting strips 125 – 6mm cube neodymium magnets Balsa wood structure to house the 5×25 Halbach array Metal in addition to hardware as long as motor st in addition to Dayton permanent magnet DC motor Digital Force Gauge Model: 475040 Displacement Transducer Model: MLT002N3000B5C Lab Work – Design Designed wheel in addition to copper track to be built Wheel in addition to track were machined by Tri-City Machining

Lab Work – Design Cont. Decided to switch from aluminum track to copper Lower resistivity of copper(Cu = 1.68×10-8 m, Al = 2.82×10-8 m) R = PcRc/(NtcNs) , where Rc is the resistivity Lift/Drag – 2v/(L/R) Aluminum Lift/Drag ratio = 0.102 Copper Lift/Drag ratio = 0.171 Lab Work – Halbach Array Device Balsa wood structure built Magnets glued into balsa wood Used shrink wrap in addition to epoxy Aluminum covering built to ensure magnets do not eject from balsa wood Lab Work – Halbach Array Device Array is 5×25 magnets = 28 mm Makes our arc length approximately 8”, with an angle of 25 degrees to either side cos(25) = .9063 Arc length s = 90.436 = 3.93 This arc length keeps 90% of the as long as ce in the vertical direction Fv = Ficos() Fi Force Diagram

Lab Work – Set up Motor st in addition to designed in addition to built to hold motor, wheel, in addition to balsa wood device Holes drilled in copper track in addition to track connected to wheel All pieces assembled into the complete system Lab Work – Set up Lab Work – Displacement Sensor Displacement sensor outputs linear voltage change as long as changes in displacement

Johnston, Betty North County Times Freelance Columnist www.phwiki.com

Problems in addition to Solutions Copper track too short Once holes drilled in copper, track became weak Magnets were very difficult to glue in direction they had to be Results – Force Measurements Results – Displacement Measurements

Results Successful levitation of 0.365 cm at 843 RPM, corresponding to a tangential velocity of 10.0 m/s Materials as long as shield are ordered in addition to will be built Future Projects Closed-loop control of levitation height Dynamically balance wheel More dampening of vibration Acknowledgements Dr. Winfred Anakwa Mr. Steven Gutschlag Mr. Joe Richey in addition to Tri-City Machining Mr. Darren DeDecker in addition to Caterpillar Inc. Mrs. Sue DeDecker Mr. Dave Miller

Results – Backup Table 1: Displacement Sensor Calibration Measurements Table 2: Force Sensor Measurement Results – Backup Table 3: Displacement Sensor Measurements Results – Backup

Johnston, Betty Freelance Columnist

Johnston, Betty is from United States and they belong to North County Times and they are from  Escondido, United States got related to this Particular Journal. and Johnston, Betty deal with the subjects like Local News

Journal Ratings by Everest Institute-Bensalem

This Particular Journal got reviewed and rated by Everest Institute-Bensalem and short form of this particular Institution is PA and gave this Journal an Excellent Rating.

 

Classical World because of Quantum Physics

Classical World because of Quantum Physics www.phwiki.com

Classical World because of Quantum Physics

Miller, Wendy, Executive Editor has reference to this Academic Journal, PHwiki organized this Journal Classical World because of Quantum Physics Johannes Kofler in addition to aslav Brukner University of Leeds, United Kingdom September 2006 Institute as long as Experimental Physics University of Vienna Institute as long as Quantum Optics in addition to Quantum In as long as mation Austrian Academy of Sciences Classical versus Quantum Phase space Continuity Newton’s laws Local Realism Macrorealism Determinism – Does this mean that the classical world is substantially different from the quantum world Hilbert space Events, ”Clicks” Schrödinger + Projection Violation of Local Realism Violation of Macrorealism R in addition to omness – When in addition to how do physical systems stop to behave quantumly in addition to begin to behave classically Macrorealism [Leggett–Garg (1985)] Macrorealism per se “A macroscopic object, which has available to it two or more macroscopically distinct states, is at any given time in a definite one of those states.” Non-invasive measurability “It is possible in principle to determine which of these states the system is in without any effect on the state itself or on the subsequent system dynamics.” t = 0 t t1 t2 Q(t1) Q(t2)

Everest Institute-Bensalem PA www.phwiki.com

This Particular University is Related to this Particular Journal

Quantity: Q Temporal correlations All macrorealistic theories fulfill the Leggett–Garg inequality t = 0 t t1 t2 t3 t4 t Violation no objective properties prior to in addition to independent of measurements When is Macrorealism violated 1/2 Spin-1/2 Classical Spin classical +1 –1 Evolution Observable Violation of macrorealism precession around x Macrorealism Violation of Macrorealism as long as macroscopically large spins Spin-j precession in magnetic field Violation of macrorealism as long as arbitrarily large spins j (totally mixed state!) Shown as long as local realism [Mermin, Peres] Parity of eigenvalue m of Jz measurement classical limit j

Coherent spin state (t = 0): exact measurement fuzzy measurement fuzzy measurement & limit of large spins This is (continuous in addition to non-invasive) classical physics of a rotated classical spin vector! The quantum-to-classical transition Classical limit: Ensemble of classical spins with probability distribution h Transition to Classicality: General state General density matrix: f can be negative! Quantum Hamilton operator: Probability as long as result m: Classical Probability to detect in a slot: h is non-negative! Hamilton function: Quantum Physics Discrete Classical Physics (macrorealism) Classical Physics (macrorealism) inaccurate measurements limit of large spins limit of large spins Macro Quantum Physics (no macrorealism) macroscopic objects macroscopic objects Relation Quantum-Classical

Is there a fundamental limit as long as observability of quantum phenomena Limit [Davis]: 2N r in addition to om amplitudes Algorithmic Complexity of Quantum States [Mora in addition to Briegel]: The length of the shortest string that encodes the preparation procedure as long as a given state with a given precision . Most of the states of N qubits are of complexity Number of bits needed to realize the state: Number of bits in the Universe [Lloyd]: Every state is effectively a mixture over all pure states that are not distinguishable within the precision Conclusions Classical physics emerges from quantum laws under the restriction of coarse-grained measurements, not alone through the limit of large quantum numbers. Conceptually different from decoherence. Not dynamical, puts the stress on observability in addition to works also as long as fully isolated systems. As the resources in the world are limited, there is a fundamental limit as long as observability of quantum phenomena (even if there is no such limit as long as the validity of quantum theory itself). quant-ph/0609079

Miller, Wendy California Monthly Executive Editor www.phwiki.com

Miller, Wendy Executive Editor

Miller, Wendy is from United States and they belong to California Monthly and they are from  Berkeley, United States got related to this Particular Journal. and Miller, Wendy deal with the subjects like Features/Lifestyle; Higher Education; Human Interest; Regional News

Journal Ratings by Everest Institute-Bensalem

This Particular Journal got reviewed and rated by Everest Institute-Bensalem and short form of this particular Institution is PA and gave this Journal an Excellent Rating.

 

Well Design PE 413 Casing Design The casing design process involves three distin

Well Design PE 413 Casing Design The casing design process involves three distin www.phwiki.com

Well Design PE 413 Casing Design The casing design process involves three distin

Pappas, Jennifer, Editorial Assistant has reference to this Academic Journal, PHwiki organized this Journal Well Design PE 413 Casing Design The casing design process involves three distinct operations: The selection of the casing sizes in addition to setting depths; The definition of the operational scenarios which will result in burst, collapse in addition to axial loads The calculation of the magnitude of these loads in addition to selection of an appropriate weight in addition to grade of casing. Casing Design Introduction Casing Design Calculate Loads on the Casing – Axial Load The axial load on the casing can be either tensile or compressive, depending on the operating conditions.

Everest Institute-Bensalem PA www.phwiki.com

This Particular University is Related to this Particular Journal

Casing Design Calculate Loads on the Casing – Axial Load Example 1 Compute the body-yield strength as long as 20’’, K-55 casing with a nominal wall thickness of 0.635’’ in addition to a nominal weight per foot of 133 lbf/ft. Example 1 Solution: d = 20.00 – 2(0.635) = 18.73’’

Casing Design Calculate Loads on the Casing – Burst Pressure The casing will experience a net burst loading if the internal radial load exceeds the external radial load. Casing Design Calculate Loads on the Casing – Burst Pressure Casing Design Calculate Loads on the Casing – Burst Pressure

If casing is subjected to internal pressure higher than external, it is said that casing is exposed to burst pressure. Burst pressure conditions occur during well control operation or squeeze cementing. Equation (4) is used to calculate the internal pressure at which the tangential stress at the inner wall of the pipe reaches the yield strength of the material. The factor 0.875 represents the allowable manufactruing tolerance of -12.5% on wall thickness. Because a burst pressure failure will not occur until after the stress exceeds the ultimate tensile strength, using a yield strength criterion as a measure of burst strength is an inherently conservative assumption. Casing Design Calculate Loads on the Casing – Burst Pressure Example 2 Compute the burst-pressure rating as long as 20’’, K-55 casing with a nominal wall thickness of 0.635’’ in addition to a nominal weight per foot of 133 lbf/ft Solution: Rounded to the nearest 10 psi: The casing will experience a net collapse loading if the external radial load exceeds the internal radial load. The greatest collapse load on the casing will occur if the casing is evacuated (empty) as long as any reason. Casing Design Calculate Loads on the Casing – Collapse Pressure

If external pressure exceeds internal pressure, the casing is subjected to collapse. Such conditions may exist during cementing operations or well evacuation. Collapse strength is primarily function of the material’s yield strength in addition to its slenderness ratio, dn/t. Casing Design Calculate Loads on the Casing – Collapse Pressure pe, pi – external in addition to internal pressure sr, st – radial in addition to tangential stresses Note: equations (5) in addition to (6) are used under no axial tension or axial compression. Data in Table 7.6 apply only as long as zero axial tension in addition to no pipe bending. Casing Design Calculate Loads on the Casing – Collapse Pressure Example 3 Consider a drillpipe of E-75 4 ½’’ outer diameter with a unit weight of 20 lb/ft inside a wellbore filled with 9.5 ppg mud. At a location of 3800 ft from the surface, pressure inside the pipe is 2000 psi, in addition to pressure outside the pipe is 1700 psi. Determine the tangential in addition to radial stresses at r = ro.

Example 3 E-75 4 ½’’ in addition to 20 lb/ft drillpipe has an inner diameter of 3.64 in. Considering “r” is equal to ro = 2.25’’ The collapse strength criteria consist of four collapse regimes determined by yield strength in addition to dn/t. Each criterion is discussed next in order of increasing dn/t. Yield strength collapse: Yield strength collapse is based on yield at the inner wall. This criterion does not represent a “collapse” pressure at all. For thick wall pipes (dn/t < 15), the tangential stress exceeds the yield strength of the material be as long as e a collapse instability failure occurs. Assumed that the pipe is subjected only to an external pressure pe. From eq. (6), the absolute value of tangential stress st is always greatest at the inner wall of the pipe in addition to that as long as burst in addition to collapse loads. Hence, the yield strength collapse occurs at the inner wall: r = ri then equation (6) becomes: Casing Design Collapse Pressure Regimes Casing Design Collapse Pressure Regimes Plastic collapse: Plastic collapse is based on empirical data from 2,488 tests of K-55, N-80 in addition to P-110 seamless casing. No analytic expression has been derived that accurately models collapse behavior in this regime. The minimum collapse pressure as long as the plastic range of collapse is calculated by equation (10). Casing Design Collapse Pressure Regimes Transition Collapse: Transition collapse is obtained by a numerical curve fitting between the plastic in addition to elastic regimes. The minimum collapse pressure as long as the plastic-to-elastic transition zone is calculated by equation (11) Casing Design Collapse Pressure Regimes Elastic Collapse: Elastic collapse is based on theoretical elastic instability failure; this criterion is independent of yield strength in addition to applicable to thin-wall pipe (dn/t > 25). The minimum collapse pressure as long as the elastic range of collapse is calculated by using equation (12) Most oilfield tubulars experience collapse in the plastic in addition to transition regimes. Casing Design Collapse Pressure Regimes

Casing Design Collapse Pressure Regimes Casing Design Collapse Pressure Regimes Apply only when axial stress is zero in addition to no internal pressure Casing Design Collapse Pressure Regimes

Pappas, Jennifer Sea Magazine Editorial Assistant www.phwiki.com

Example Compute the collapse pressure rating as long as 20’’, K-55 casing with a nominal wall thickness of 0.635’’ in addition to a nominal weight per foot of 133 lbf/ft. Solution: dn/t = 20/0.635 = 31.49 This is the transition collapse All the pipe strength equations previously given are based on a zero axial stress state. This idealized situation never occurs in oilfield applications because pipe in a wellbore is always subjected to combined loading conditions. The fundamental basis of casing design is that if stresses in the pipe wall exceed the yield strength of the material, a failure condition exists. Hence the yield strength is a measure of the maximum allowable stress. To evaluate the pipe strength under combined loading conditions, the uniaxial yield strength is compared to the yielding condition. Casing Design Combined Stress Effects The most widely accepted yielding criterion is based on the maximum distortion energy theory, which is known as the Huber-Von-Mises Theory. This theory states that if the triaxial stress exceeds the yield strength, a yield failure is indicated. Note that the triaxial stress is not a true stress. It is a theoretical value that allows a generalized three-dimensional stress state to be compared with a uniaxial failure criterion (the yield strength). Casing Design Combined Stress Effects

Casing Design Combined Stress Effects Setting the triaxial stress equal to the yield strength in addition to solving equation (13) give the results: Equation (14) is as long as the ellipse of plasticity. Combining Eq. (14) in addition to eq. (6) together in addition to let r = ri, will give the combinations of internal pressure, external pressure in addition to axial stress that will result in a yield strength mode of failure. Casing Design Combined Stress Effects As axial tension increases, the critical burst-pressure increases in addition to the critical collapse-pressure decreases. In contrast, as the axial compression increases, the critical burst-pressure decreases in addition to the critical collapse-pressure increases. Casing Design Combined Stress Effects

Example For in-service conditions of sz = 40,000 psi in addition to pi = 10,000 psi Solving eq. (14) gives

Pappas, Jennifer Editorial Assistant

Pappas, Jennifer is from United States and they belong to Sea Magazine and they are from  Irvine, United States got related to this Particular Journal. and Pappas, Jennifer deal with the subjects like Boating

Journal Ratings by Everest Institute-Bensalem

This Particular Journal got reviewed and rated by Everest Institute-Bensalem and short form of this particular Institution is PA and gave this Journal an Excellent Rating.

 

Comparison of Spatial Outcomes (LIHTC vs Tenant Based Section 8) How the LIHTC differs by MSAs Case Study Identification in addition to Data

 www.phwiki.com

 

The Above Picture is Related Image of Another Journal

 

Comparison of Spatial Outcomes (LIHTC vs Tenant Based Section 8) How the LIHTC differs by MSAs Case Study Identification in addition to Data

Everest Institute-Bensalem, PA has reference to this Academic Journal, Comparing the Efficiency in addition to Equity Advantages of Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program (LIHTC) alongside Section 8 Voucher Program A Regional Difference Lan Deng Dept. of City in addition to Regional Planning University of California at Berkeley Research Question How should limited government housing subsidies be directed via supply-side investment programs such as public housing or the LIHTC program? or by demand-side programs like housing vouchers? Two Sets of Evaluation Criteria Which approach is better at providing quality neighborhoods in addition to economic opportunity so that low-income families? Which approach is more efficient in terms of lifetime costs?

 Russel, Sam Everest Institute-Bensalem www.phwiki.com

 

Related University That Contributed for this Journal are Acknowledged in the above Image

 

Organization Of This Presentation Case Study Identification in addition to Data How the LIHTC differs by MSAs Comparison of Spatial Outcomes (LIHTC vs TB-Section 8) Comparison of Cost Effectiveness (LIHTC vs TB-Section 8) Case Study Identification in addition to Data Case Study Regions Four case study regions: Tight Markets: San Jose PMSA, Boston PMSA Balanced Markets: Miami MSA, Cleveland PMSA Differences among these regional housing markets: Growth difference New regions vs. established regions. Difference in the severity of housing segregation in addition to discrimination

Data in consideration of this Research LIHTC Database, collected from the following state agencies: Florida Housing Finance Corporation Ohio Housing Finance Agency California Tax Credit Allocation Committee Massachusetts State Dept. of Housing in addition to Community Development Dataset 1: General Project Information in consideration of all LIHTC projects in each region from 1987 so that 2000. Dataset 2: Financial Structure, Unit Composition, Rent Information in consideration of available projects, extracted from a project?s Final Cost Certification File or Underwriting Reports etc. How Many LIHTC Projects? Where? Other Data Sources Section 8 Voucher / Certificate Data, from A Picture of Subsidized Households in 1998, HUD 1990 in addition to 2000 census data, Summary Tape File 3 Public school performance data, from the Education Department in individual state. Also, Fair Market Rent in addition to Area Median Family Income, HUD R.S. Mean?s Historic Construction Cost Index; Historic 30-year conventional mortgage rate from Federal Reserve Bank

Comparison of Spatial Outcomes (LIHTC vs Tenant Based Section 8) How the LIHTC differs by MSAs Case Study Identification in addition to Data

How the LIHTC differs by MSAs Miami vs. Cleveland: For-profit New Construction dominates in Miami. It?s the opposite in Cleveland. San Jose vs. Boston: New Construction dominates in San Jose, the opposite in Boston. Non-profits dominate in both.

LIHTC projects tend so that be larger in Miami in addition to San Jose than in Cleveland in addition to Boston. Especially in consideration of new construction. Development costs vary widely by region, alongside Miami at the low end in addition to Boston at the high end. (Dollar in 1996 Value) Comparison of Spatial Outcomes (LIHTC vs Tenant Based Section 8) Neighborhood Income Neighborhood Racial Composition School Quality

Except in consideration of San Jose, most of LIHTC in addition to Section 8 units are located in very low income in addition to low Income neighborhoods Tenant-based Section 8 program not always works better than LIHTC program in bringing low income families so that middle income neighborhoods % of Units in Middle Income Neighborhoods (Except in consideration of Boston) similar proportions of assisted families are located in the most segregated neighborhoods, regardless of program type. Ghettos: over 80% are blacks over 10% are blacks

In Miami, 80% of LIHTC units are proximate so that low-quality schools, vs. 51% of Section 8 units (Quality is standardized according so that the average metropolitan school performance scores) In Cleveland, 70% of both LIHTC units in addition to Section 8 units are proximate so that low quality schools, but more LIHTC units close so that the worst schools In San Jose, the school quality distribution of LIHTC units in addition to Section 8 units are very similar

In Boston, 80% of LIHTC units are proximate so that low quality school, vs. 60% of Section 8 units Comparison of Cost Effectiveness (LIHTC vs Tenant Based Section 8) Average Development Subsidy across Regions Development Subsidy vs. 30-year Voucher Subsidy The Subsidy Story in Dollars: The required subsidy in Boston is more than twice what is in Miami. (New Construction Projects in the Late 90s.) TDC: Total Development Cost

In Boston in addition to Cleveland,the LIHTC development subsidy is greater than 30-year Section 8 voucher subsidy, but the opposite holds in San Jose in addition to Miami. In Miami, projects targeting larger family units tend so that be more cost effective (New Construction Projects in the Late 90s) Cost Effectiveness Ratio = A Project?s Total Development Subsidy / 30-Year Voucher Subsidy In San Jose, LIHTC Projects have become more cost effective over time (New Construction Projects) Cost Effectiveness Ratio = A Project?s Total Development Subsidy / 30-Year Voucher Subsidy

In San Jose, projects targeting lower income families also tend so that be more cost effective Cost Effectiveness Ratio = A Project?s Total Development Subsidy / 30-Year Voucher Subsidy Concluding Remarks: Differences in spatial outcomes between LIHTC in addition to Section 8 tend so that be modest, in addition to the result of local factors. Contrary so that the conventional wisdom, a supply subsidy program like LIHTC can actually be more cost-effective than a demand subsidy program like Section 8. Regional variations influence the efficiency in addition to equity advantage of different government housing programs. Relevant factors might include Local housing supply in addition to demand. Local Family Income. Different government practices in administering LIHTC program. The existence of housing segregation in addition to discrimination in local housing markets. Specific project design. I Need Your Help!!! Does anyone here have rent in addition to stock characteristic information in consideration of market rate rental housing properties in Boston, Cleveland, Miami, or San Jose? Thank you!!

Russel, Sam Editorial Assistant

Russel, Sam is from United States and they belong to Editorial Assistant and work for SF Weekly in the CA state United States got related to this Particular Article.

Journal Ratings by Everest Institute-Bensalem

This Particular Journal got reviewed and rated by In Boston in addition to Cleveland,the LIHTC development subsidy is greater than 30-year Section 8 voucher subsidy, but the opposite holds in San Jose in addition to Miami. In Miami, projects targeting larger family units tend so that be more cost effective (New Construction Projects in the Late 90s) Cost Effectiveness Ratio = A Project?s Total Development Subsidy / 30-Year Voucher Subsidy In San Jose, LIHTC Projects have become more cost effective over time (New Construction Projects) Cost Effectiveness Ratio = A Project?s Total Development Subsidy / 30-Year Voucher Subsidy and short form of this particular Institution is PA and gave this Journal an Excellent Rating.