RU2336189C1 - Conveying system - Google Patents

Abstract

FIELD: transportation.

SUBSTANCE: conveying system includes running route with set of rolling surfaces and transport vehicle with displaced center of gravity outfitted by inferior bearing wheels and upper guide wheels. Inferior bearing wheels are mounted out of upright. Inferior rolling surface is atilt located and of sag profile. Inferior bearing wheels deflection angle is received from: tgα=b/(h₁+h₂), where α - deflection angle, b - average distance from transport vehicle center of gravity to central line of inferior rolling surface, h₁ - center of gravity average elevation above central line of inferior rolling surface, h₂ - distance between centre of gravity and central line of upper rolling surface.

EFFECT: improving of conveying system reliability.

1 dwg

Description

The invention relates to the field of transport mechanisms with a given trajectory and can be used for transporting people with disabilities in large hospital complexes, as well as visitors to exhibitions and other entertainment events.

Throughout the XX century. many inventors tried to create a horizontal elevator. We are talking about a system designed to transport a small number of passengers at a distance of 3-5 km, and at the same time easily integrated into the existing urban infrastructure. Conventional vehicles, even when equipped with environmentally friendly and quiet engines, still require paved tracks or rails, as well as space for “parking”. In addition, they inevitably pose a danger to others. The problem is especially acute where people with disabilities are potential passengers - in large hospital complexes, in sanatoriums, etc. places. An ideal option would be to move the vehicle along a wall like an elevator car.

One of the first transport systems of the "wall" type is described in US Pat. USA No. 1,431.536 (IPC B61B 13/04, 10/10/1922). According to the author’s plan, the cabins were supposed to move on both sides of the light overpass, for which they were equipped with support wheels from above and horizontal guide wheels (rollers) from below. It was planned to place passengers on the side seats with their backs to the running track.

Despite the amazing simplicity of the project, it could hardly be put into practice. The fact is that with the center of gravity of the cabin shifted, lateral force is applied to the upper support wheel, and it tends to move off the rolling surface. The author understood this problem and provided for the support wheels with a special groove in the bottom of which they supposedly should move freely. However, the lateral force presses the wheel against the outer wall of the groove, due to which friction increases sharply and intensive wear of the rubber tire occurs. In addition, precipitation inevitably accumulates in the groove, and foreign objects can also get into it.

A modern version of the local transport system is described in US Pat. US No. 5.934.198 (IPC B61B 13/04, 08/10/1999). Here, a linear electric motor appears as a drive device. There is also a very complex linkage, the purpose of which is to compensate for the mass imbalance. Since each cabin is designed for only two passengers, the design seems unnecessarily complicated. In addition, the roadway is poorly developed - the “main detail” of any such project.

In US Pat. RF №2.060.184 (IPC В61В 13/08, 05/20/1996) describes the original vehicle, which is theoretically able to ride on a vertical wall due to the "suction cup". However, the author did not bother to evaluate the fan power to create at least a weak vacuum in the absence of a seal (“skirt”). It is clear that without a seal, air will be idle, but how to create a reliable sliding seal is still unclear. It remains to add that this problem has become truly fatal for most hovercraft.

Closer to reality is the transport system built into the existing infrastructure, described in US Pat. USA No. 5.456.183 (IPC B61B 13/04, 10/10/1995).

At the first glance at the drawings, an abundance of all kinds of wheels — rubberized and metal, such as railroad wheels — immediately catches your eye. Taught by the bitter experience of its predecessors, the author set himself the task of achieving 100% cabin stability (probably even in the case of a hurricane). On the other hand, there is an attempt to move from small cabs to real cars - in the image and likeness of the famous "monorails". Unfortunately, this path obviously leads to a dead end: it is the problem of mass imbalance that remains unresolved over the century of the existence of monorail vehicles. Since the placement of passengers in the passenger compartment of urban public transport is random, the carriage on the narrow load-bearing beam is unstable - like a ship, it experiences “on-board” and “keel” pitching. In addition, an asymmetric (accidentally or intentionally) car creates a torque in the beam itself, which is also highly undesirable. The easiest and most convenient way to reduce the imbalance is a special lateral arrangement of passenger seats in the car (cabin), which was the case in early projects.

So, the optimal layout of the cab has already been determined and is not subject to further review. The only thing that can still be reviewed is the number and location of the wheels. It is advisable to get by with a minimal amount, as well as to exclude balancers or complex pendants. Let us return to the 1922 project: as already mentioned above, its “weak point” is the groove for the support wheels located on top. If you move the support wheels down, a new problem arises - the problem of stabilizing the top of the cab. So that the cabin does not “fall out” of the running track, it is necessary to supply it with additional wheels or rollers.

PROTOTYPE. In US Pat. US No. 4,690.064 (IPC B61B 13/04, 09/09/1987) describes a vehicle of the considered “asymmetric” type, which has three groups of wheels. The most important is the location of the rolling surface of the upper horizontal wheel on the inner surface of the "visor", which closes the running track from above. To compensate for lateral effort, the author introduced a third wheel rolling along the outer surface of the beam below the main (supporting) wheel.

In fact, the proposed system is an improved version of the original design of 1922. However, the "improvement" is more speculative than practical. In order for the cabin with a shifted center of gravity to be stable and not to swing during movement, the horizontal wheels should be installed with some “interference fit”, i.e. they must constantly compress the running way. Of course, friction in this case increases and becomes obviously greater than that of a conventional wheeled crew of equal mass. This intractable problem is typical of all "monorails" and is the main reason for their relatively rare use in the modern world. To ensure the stability of the vehicle on a narrow beam, many authors propose rather sophisticated automatic control systems again using swinging frames or balancers (see, for example, US Pat. No. 4,996,928).

The objective of the present invention is to develop an extremely simple, but comfortable and reliable "local" (ie, built into the infrastructure) transport system.

The problem is solved according to the claims at the expense of features common to the prototype — such as a transport system including a track with a set of rolling surfaces and a vehicle with a displaced center of gravity, equipped with lower support wheels and upper guide wheels, and distinctive, essential features of such how the lower support wheels are installed with a deviation from the vertical, and the lower rolling surface is inclined and has a concave profile, while the angle of deviation of the lower support wheels from vertical is from the ratio:

tgα = b / (h ₁ + h ₂ ),

where α is the angle of deviation from the vertical, b is the average distance from the vertical passing through the center of gravity of the vehicle to the center line of the lower rolling surface, h ₁ is the average elevation of the center of gravity above the center line of the lower rolling surface, h ₂ is the distance between the center of gravity and the center line of the upper rolling surface.

DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

The invention is illustrated in the drawing, explaining the main structural idea.

The local transport system includes a running track 1 with a set of rolling surfaces 2, 3 and a vehicle 4 with an offset center of gravity, equipped with lower support wheels 5 and upper guide wheels 6. The lower support wheels 4 are installed with a deviation from the vertical, and the lower rolling surface 2 is also located at an appropriate angle, while the deviation angle is from the ratio:

tgα = b / (h ₁ + h ₂ ),

where α is the angle of deviation from the vertical, b is the average distance from the vertical passing through the center of gravity of the vehicle 4 to the center line of the lower rolling surface, h ₁ is the average elevation of the center of gravity above the center line of the lower rolling surface, h ₂ is the distance between the center of gravity and the center line of the upper rolling surface.

The device is equipped with a safety bracket 7. The lower rolling surface from the inside and outside has a smooth rise relative to the inclined plane.

Since the position of the center of gravity of the vehicle relative to the upper and lower rolling surfaces depends on the number of passengers, the angle of inclination of the lower rolling surface 2 may be insufficient, and then the support wheel 5 goes towards the load-bearing wall. If the angle of inclination of the rolling surface is excessive, then the support wheel is shifted closer to the edge of the rolling surface. In both cases, the wheel interacts with the rolling surface only part of the tire, which is undesirable. Deviation from the center line of the flat rolling surface is accompanied by “positive feedback”, and oscillations occur - the wheel moves along a sinusoid.

It is interesting to note that in the late 40s. XX century similar instability of the front wheel of the aircraft landing gear caused a lot of trouble to designers. Since aircraft designers could not set a different landing strip profile other than a plane, they were forced to find a solution inside the aircraft. Here, it is quite possible to change the shape of the driving shelf - in order to stabilize the rolling mode of the support wheels, the rolling surface 2 has a concave profile. We can say that the groove is returned to its place of honor, but now it is under the "roof", is inclined and has a relatively shallow depth. All of these factors ensure that the groove is not clogged.

It is advisable to choose the base angle of inclination, based on full load - because it makes no sense to drive empty cabs along the line. Of course, passengers differ markedly in weight, but it is unlikely that they will all be fat. It should be emphasized that a small deviation of the center of gravity does not violate the stability of the cab, but only slightly increases friction.

In conclusion, it remains to add that the real angle of inclination of the support wheel 5 is in the range of 10-15 °, and the load on the upper guide wheel 6 decreases with height:

F _upper = P · tgα · h ₁ / (h ₁ + h ₂ ).

Thus, it is advantageous to position the upper rolling plane as high as possible above the cab. In the prototype, the wheels are grouped at approximately the same level, which further complicates the stabilization of the vehicle. With all that said, the “wall-mounted” version of the transport system is optimal, and the cab should really resemble an elevator car with a “blank” inner wall.

Modern automation makes it possible to ensure maximum convenience of using the "local" transport system. The passenger simply enters the cabin, sits down and presses the desired key on the control panel - further happens similarly to the action of a conventional elevator mechanism.

From the description and practical application of the present invention, other particular forms of its implementation will be apparent to those skilled in the art. This description and examples are considered as material illustrating the invention, the essence of which and the scope of patent claims are defined in the following claims, a combination of essential features and their equivalents.

Claims (1)

A transport system including a running track with a set of rolling surfaces and a vehicle with a displaced center of gravity, equipped with lower support wheels and upper guide wheels, characterized in that the lower support wheels are installed with a deviation from the vertical, and the lower rolling surface is inclined and has a concave profile, while the angle of deviation of the lower support wheels from the vertical is found from the ratio: tgα = b / (h ₁ + h ₂ ), where α is the angle of deviation from the vertical, b is the average distance from the center of gravity of the vehicle to the center line of the lower rolling surface, h ₁ is the average elevation of the center of gravity above the center line of the lower rolling surface, h ₂ is the distance between the center of gravity and the center line of the upper surface rolling.