Hyperloop United FINAL REPORT

0
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS 1
Information of Current Team Members 3
1. Pod Preliminary Information Table 4
2. Pod Design and Analysis 5

2.1 Detailed Design Summary 5
2.2 Pod Dimensions 12
2.3 Aerodynamic Analysis 13
2.4 Mass of Pod 21
2.5 Pod materials 24
2.6 Structural Analysis 25
3. Pod Power Consumption 34
4. Energy Sources on the Pod 35

4.1 Features of the Battery Packs 36
4.1.1 Dimensions and 3D drawing 36
4.1.2 Battery Position on the Pod 37
4.1.3 Used Materials and Properties 37
4.2 Electrical Specifications of Battery Pack 38
4.2.1 The Chemistry and Electrical Features of the Battery Pack 38
4.2.2 Number of Cells and Cell Configuration 39
4.2.3 Energy and Power Specifications of Battery Pack 39
4.3 Security 40
4.3.1 Battery Management System Features 40
4.3.1.1 Input - Output Connectors 41
4.3.1.2 Voltage Sensing 42
4.3.1.3 Current Sensing 43
4.3.1.4 MOSFETs as Power Switch 44
4.3.1.5 MOSFET Gate Drivers 46
4.3.1.6 Power Distribution 46
4.3.1.7 Battery Management System Preview 47
4.3.2 Placement of Temperature Sensors 49
4.3.3 Safety Equipment (contactor, fuse, etc.) 50
4.3.4 Security Algorithm Details 51
5. Pod Navigation System and Sensor Information 52

5.1 Pod Navigation System 55
5.2 Tachometer 61
5.3 Temperature Sensors 64
5.4 Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) 66
5.5 Height IR Sensor 69
5.6 Current Sensor 71
1
5.7 Shielding 71
6. Pod Levitation System 71
7. Pod Propulsion System 81

7.1. Linear Induction Motor Driver 88
8. Brake System of the Pod and Velocity Plots 96

8.1 Brake System Design and Calculations 98
8.2 Thermal analysis of braking system 103
9. Pod Stability System 106
10. Pod Heat Dispersion 110
11. Pod Production Steps 110
12. Pod Safety Equipments and Commissioning Process 127
13. Communication and Video Transfer by Using IPCAM 136
14. Comments for Scaled Hyperloop Tunnel 139
15. Budget Table 147
References 148
Appendix 149
2
Information of Current Team Members
No Name - Surname University and Department Grade Role
1 Şükrü Furkan Kadir Has University 3 Captain

Kayaalp Electrical - Electronics Engineering
2 Çağlar Saatli Kadir Has University 3 Member

Industrial Product Design
3 Serhat Buğra Boğaziçi University 4 Member

Kalkan Mechanical Engineering
4 Barış Gökdemir Sabancı University PhD Member

Materials Science and
Nanoengineering
5 Amir Boğaziçi University PhD Member

Abdolhosseinzadeh Mechanical Engineering
6 Yalın Evrim Kadir Has University 3 Member

Yeşilırmak Electrical - Electronics Engineering
7 Çağrı Işıkver Kadir Has University 3 Member

Electrical - Electronics Engineering
8 Ümit Şen Kadir Has University 3 Member

Mechatronics Engineering
9 Deren Aydın Kadir Has University 2 Member

Electrical - Electronics Engineering
10 Selim Can Kadir Has University 1 Member

Al-Khatib Electrical - Electronics Engineering
11 Onur Kağan Kadir Has University 3 Member

Orulluoğlu Electrical - Electronics Engineering
12 Halil İbrahim Kocaeli University 3 Member

Güngül Electrical Engineering
13 Barış Karaali Middle East Technical University 1 Member

Food Engineering
14 Umut Ulaş Aydın Sabancı University 2 Member

Computer Science
15 Mehmet Timur Kadir Has University Prof. Mentor

Aydemir Electrical - Electronics Engineering Dr.
3
1. Pod Preliminary Information Table
Feature Unit Explanation
Length mm 1480
Width mm 500
Height mm 247
Pod Mass kg 77.769
Chassis & Shell Chassis: Carbon Fiber - Epoxy

Material Type
Material Shell: Fiberglass - Polyester
Hardness of Brake Pad Shore A 70
Linear Motor,
Propulsion System Pression Tube, Linear Motor
Other
Linear Induction Motor

Electric Motor Type
Brushless step motor
10.8 (DSLIM)
Electric Motor Power kW
0.8 (Levitation)
Number and Type of

Number 0
Pressure Cylinder
7.4 (electronics)
Battery Rated Voltage V 44.4 (propulsion)
22.2 (levitation)
59.2 (electronics)
Battery Rated Power Wh 976.8 (propulsion)
137.64 (levitation)
RJ-45 Socket Shielded Cat 6a

Communication Type Ethernet
Cable
4
2. Pod Design and Analysis
2.1 Detailed Design Summary
In this report, all length units for the technical drawings are in millimeters.
The pod was designed, according to minimum lightweight, maximum security.

Literature was examined and the most applicable pod design was determined. The
properties of pod explain below titles.
The shell of the pod is designed to be made of fiberglass-polyester composite. The

composite of the shell has sufficient durability, low cost,accessibility of materials
when it compares to other composites. In addition, ease of processing properties is
the factor of choice. Firstly internal components were designed and assembled on
chassis using the Rhinoceros 3D design program. So shell and chassis dimensions
appeared.
Figure 2.1: x, y and z axes of the pod.
Figure 2.2: The side view of the pod with internal components.
Figure 2.3: The top view of the pod with internal components.
5
According to the competition criteria, a tow hook is designed, which the production
process is going, add to the middle of the pod's back side. The tow hook is designed
to assemble and disassemble easily. The hook has a screw and it would hold inside
of the shell with an M8 fiber nut.
Figure 2.4: Tow hook dimensions.
Figure 2.5: Mounting the tow hook on the shell.
Figure 2.6: Back view of the pod.
To communicate with the pod, a network access module will be implemented on the
chassis (see Figure 2.7).
6
Figure 2.7: Location of the network access module on chassis.
Figure 2.8: Location of ground cable of network access module on chassis.
7
Figure 2.9: Montage details of the network access module.
Figure 2.10: Active levitation system of the pod to levitate even at 0 km/h.
In Figure 2.10, the levitation system’s mechanical components are designed for
avoiding damages on the motors. By using this way, motors do not carry the weight
of the magnet arrays but bearings do.
8
Figure 2.11: DSLIM system of the pod.
The brake system is designed as basic, light, and highly effective. The brake system
is explained in detail at Section 8.
Figure 2.12: Brake systems.
Stabilization wheels were designed to consider three different missions. Four wheels
are for moving without energy, four wheels are vertical stability, and other four wheels
are horizontal stability. Stabilization system is explained in detail at Section 8.
9
Figure 2.13: Stabilization wheels on chassis.
Figure 2.14: Pod electronics.
10
Figure 2.15: Position of the batteries on the pod.
The chassis of the pod is designed of carbon fibers-epoxy composite. The major
reason for the choice to carbon fiber-epoxy is composite high mechanical properties.
All stress and weight of the pod would apply on the chassis.
Figure 2.16: Chassis and shell modeling.
In case of emergency, there are opening windows on the brake systems to open
brakes (see Figure 2.17).
11
Figure 2.17: Access points to the brake systems and freewheels.
With the brake system that opens to push the pod manually, the pod can be pushed
easily thanks to the free wheels after the brakes are released.
2.2 Pod Dimensions
Figure 2.18: Dimensions of the pod.
12
Figure 2.19: Forbidden zone versus pod in tunnel section.
2.3 Aerodynamic Analysis
The aerodynamic analysis is conducted by using ANSYS. By evaluating the pod

geometry, drag and lift forces and coefficients that are significant parameters for pod
dynamics are found. By evaluating these results and considering both the positive
and negative effects of drag and lift forces during the motion, design is iterated.
During the designing of the pod, below parameters are considered:
In order for the POD's shell to be optimally applicable, the lines forming the POD's
shell have been designed in accordance with aerodynamic analyzes with a minimum
control point. In this principle, the minimum control point is requested because the
lines that reveal the surface should reveal the surfaces in the most flexible way. As
the control point increases, it becomes easier to control the surface, but the risk of
error increases considerably. In order to eliminate the risk of error, it is necessary to
work with minimum control points.
13
To evaluate this design on ANSYS, the pod is covered by a box that has dimensions
of 2m × 0.6m × 0.6m in x, y, and z axes as it is shown in Figure 2.20. Meshing is
applied to both the box and the pod. 0.2 meter element size is applied for the box
and 0.015 meter element size is applied for the pod since the flow around the pod is
more critical. The mesh model is shown in Figure 2.21 and 2.22.
Figure 2.20: The box model for aerodynamic analysis.
Figure 2.21: The mesh model for aerodynamic analysis.
14
Figure 2.22: The mesh model for aerodynamic analysis.
The process of conducting an aerodynamic analysis is pressure-based and steady

state. Since it is an effective technique to depict turbulent effects and the design does
not include complex flow with strong curvatures, a realizable k-epsilon viscous model
is utilized for the turbulent model. At 1 bar of pressure and 308 Kelvin, air is chosen
as the fluid's material. Inlet air velocity is selected as 26 m/s that is approximately 94
km/h. For the turbulence model, turbulence intensity is selected as 5% and turbulent
viscosity ratio is selected as 10. Outlet conditions are selected as 5% backflow
turbulent intensity and 10 backflow turbulent viscosity ratio.
The pod geometry is lastly iterated by removing some curvatures due to feasibility
concerns during the manufacturing of the pod. In the latest design,
Figure 2.23: First design (a) last design (b)
The same aerodynamic analysis is applied to both the previous and the latest
designs and can be seen in Figure 2.23. The latest design change directly affected
the drag coefficient that is one of the most significant parameters for aerodynamics of
the pod. The drag coefficient is changed from 0.42 to 0.45 which has negative effects
during the acceleration and positive effects during the deceleration.
The pressure profiles of the latest pod design are shown in Figure 2.24. As it is seen
in Figure 2.24, there is a pressure increase through the body in the front area of the
15
pod and pressure decrease in the rear area since the force vector is outward from
the body as expected.
Figure 2.24: Pressure profile around the pod.
Velocity vectors on the pod surface is shown in Figure 2.25 and velocity profile
around the pod is shown in Figure 2.26. When the velocity profile is evaluated, it is
seen that vortices occur in the rear side of the pod that is in the wake region since
the flow separation occurs in that area. Due to pressure buildup where the pod and
air first touch, as shown in Figure 2.26, the front side of the pod experiences a drop
in velocity. The air on the upper side of the pod follows the small curvature in the
upper side. So, high speed streaming that has a positive effect on drag coefficients
occurs.
16
Figure 2.25: Velocity vectors on the pod.
Figure 2.26: Velocity profile around the pod.
17
Drag coefficient of the pod is found as 0.445 that is a fairly competitive value if it is
compared with high performance cars and it is shown in Figure 2.27. Even this value
has positive effects during speeding up, it prevents using aerodynamics to
decelerate. Since 1 bar will be used as environmental conditions and brake time is
one of the most significant criterias during the pod’s design, it directly affects the
brake performance. By using (2.1) that gives the drag force, the drag force graph is
also plotted.
2 𝐴
𝐹𝑑 = ρ * 𝑣 * 𝐶𝑑 * 2
(2.1)
where;
𝐹𝑑 is drag force,
ρ is the density of air,
𝑣 is the velocity of pod,
𝐶𝑑 is the drag coefficient,
𝐴 is the cross sectional area.
The drag coefficient is added in this equation and drag force is added to the code that
gives instant forces according to the instant velocity during the movement as it can
be seen in Appendix A.1.
Figure 2.27: Drag coefficient.
18
Figure 2.28: Drag force.
Figure 2.29: Drag Force vs Time in normal scenario.
19
By evaluating lift coefficient and drag coefficient results, it is seen that lift effects are
minimal and can be neglected. The lift coefficient graph is shown in Figure 2.30 and
the lift force graph is shown in Figure 2.31.
Figure 2.30: Lift coefficient.
Figure 2.31: Lift force.
20
Drag and lift forces at the maximum velocity are shown on the pod in Figure 2.32.
Figure 2.32: Drag and lift forces at the maximum velocity.
For higher velocities, shock waves that occur in the tunnel during the motion should
also be considered. One of the main negative effects of the shockwaves is the
dramatic increase in the temperature in the direction of motion, that is the piston
region. This negative effect is directly affected by the velocity of the pod and the
blockage ratio [1]. Since the designed pod will not reach higher velocities during the
competition, these effects are minimal and will be neglected.
2.4 Mass of Pod
Detailed mass is given in Table 2.1.
Table 2.1: Mass of the pod.
21
·
Figure 2.33: Center of gravity of all subsystems.
22
Figure 2.34: Center of gravity of the batteries
Figure 2.35: Pod's center of gravity.
Except for the battery, all other subsystems and cards are placed symmetrically, so
their center of gravity is in the middle of the pod. The center of gravity of the battery
is calculated separately. Then, when the center of gravity of the battery and other
components is calculated, the center of gravity of the pod is 47 mm behind the
center. This shift is in a state that the flight controller controlling the levitation system
can easily tolerate.
23
2.5 Pod materials
Pod materials are shown in Table 2.2.
Table 2.2: Used materials in the pod and reasons.
Components Materials Analysis Comments
Shell Fiberglass-Polyester Easy production, low cost, sufficient

Composite mechanical properties
Chassis Carbon Fiber-Epoxy Lightweight, high mechanical properties

Composite
Brake shafts Aluminium(6061) Lightweight, high durability
Brake pads Rubber High friction coefficient, low hardness
Brake pads holders Aluminium(6061) Lightweight, high durability
Brake side arms Aluminium(6061) Lightweight, high durability
Levitation motors Polylactic Acid (filament) Easy production, low cost, sufficient
holders mechanical properties
Linear motors holders Polylactic Acid (filament) Easy production, low cost, sufficient
mechanical properties
24
2.6 Structural Analysis
Brake System Structural Analysis
Brake system was designed according to scissors logic. There are 2 different
locations on the chassis which are assembled with small holder shafts (Figure 2.36
and Section 8.). Upper and lower shafts connected with spring and at the stable
position brakes squeeze. While the pod is running condition, the brake pads get open
positions thanks to the steel wire connection to the brake motor. Static and dynamic
analysis were made by Solidworks.
Figure 2.36: Technical drawing of the brake system.
Static Analysis of Brake System
Prediction of the maximum stress in the brake system is on the side brake arms
when it gets into an open situation. Both brake motors and force springs are effective
on these arms. The material of these arms are aluminum 6061 alloy. External
retaining rings removed from analysis to create maximum stress conditions on the
framework.
Brake system was meshed as a part of the analysis process (Figure 2.37). For more
accurate results, motors and springs were hidden but their forces add on simulation.
These forces are shown as arrows (Figure 2.37). Red arrow is gravity (9.81m / s 2),
which is bigger than other ones. Then the system was illustrated and analyzed as a
static situation. Von Mises criteria was used as an acceptance criteria. Aluminum
6061 alloy has 55 MPa maximum yield strength.
25
Figure 2.37: Mesh geometry and force application of brake system.
As the result of static analysis maximum stress occurs at the connection point with
brake motors and arms. An expected result has occurred.The maximum stress
observed was about 16 MPa according to Von Mises. As a result of static result and
max yield stress brake system is reliable and usable.
Figure 2.38: Stress analysis result of brake system.
26
Dynamic analysis of brake system
Dynamic analysis was made for the brake squeeze situation. Between pads and rail
friction forces occur and it has an effect as additional stress on the arms. Friction
coefficient is 0.45 between pads and rail. Between sliding components(shafts and
arms) friction coefficient is 0.1.
The result of dynamic analysis is that the maximum stress occurs between the holder
shaft and arm. The maximum stress observed was 32 MPa according to Von Mises
criteria. As a result of dynamic analysis results and max yield stress, the brake
system is reliable and usable(yield strength of 6061 55 MPa). When the static and
dynamic analysis results are compared, it is seen that the friction forces apply a
stress of 18 MPa on brake arms at the squeezing position of the brakes, therefore,
the dynamic analysis results confirmed the static analysis.
Figure 2.39: Dynamic analysis stress result of brake arm
Figure 2.40: Maximum stress point of brake arm
27
Levitation System Structural Analysis
Structural analysis is conducted for running conditions of levitation motors since the
maximum force, which is 250 N through upward, is applied during this part of the
motion. Geometry is fixed from the joints that attach the induction motor system and
chassis and force is applied as contact force from the surfaces between motor
magnets and main shaft as it is shown in Figure 2.41.
Figure 2.41: Fixed supports and the force application point on the levitation system.
During the meshing, 0,01 element size which is acceptable quality for accurate
results is used. Mesh geometry is shown in Figure 2.42. The material for all parts is
selected as Aluminum alloy. Parts are joined by using screw-nut fixings. To provide
the rotation of the shaft which is settled in the middle, ball bearing that restricts
movement in any direction and only provides rotational movement is used.
Figure 2.42: Mesh geometry of levitation system.
28
By evaluating structural analysis results of the levitation system, it is seen that most
of the deformation occurs around the bearing since the force is transmitted from the
bearing. Also, fixing points expose maximum deformation and stresses. The total
deformation of the levitation system is shown in Figure 2.43. After evaluation of the
deformation of the system, equivalent plastic strain is evaluated to see if the strain
results in especially highly deformed points by using ANSYS. It is observed that there
is not any plastic strain point in the system. So, all points are settled in the elastic
region of the stress-strain curve which means all strains are below the 0.02 strain
limit. Since elastic strains do not deform the body permanently, design and material
selection is safe to use for this application.
Figure 2.43: Total deformation on the levitation system.
Linear Motor System Structural Analysis
Structural analysis is conducted for running conditions of induction motors since the
maximum force, which is 130 N, is applied during this part of the motion. Geometry is
fixed from the chassis to see the maximum deflection on the induction motor and
joints. Force is applied from the side of the induction motors. Fixed geometry is
shown in Figure 2.44 and force application point is shown in Figure 2.45.
29
Figure 2.44: Fixed supports on the linear motor system.
Figure 2.45: Force direction and application area.
During the meshing, 0,01 element size which is acceptable quality for accurate
results is used. Mesh geometries are shown in Figure 2.46 and Figure 2.47.
Structural steel is selected as casing material. For the motor, silicon based laminated
electrical steel that is a strong material is selected. Casing of linear induction motor
and chassis are joined by using screw-nut fixings. Motor is glued to the casing from
the side areas by using industrial adhesive that provides a strong bond between
casing and motor.
30
Figure 2.46: Mesh geometry of both chassis and linear motor system.
Figure 2.47: Mesh geometry of linear motor system.
By evaluating structural analysis results of the linear motor system, it is seen that
most of the deformation occurs in the side area of the motor since the force is
transmitted through the motor. Most of the stresses occur inside the motor. That is
why a strong material is selected during the motor design. The total deformation of
the levitation system is shown in Figure 2.48 and Figure 2.49. After evaluation of the
deformation of the system, equivalent plastic strain is evaluated to see strain results
in especially highly deformed points by using ANSYS. It is observed that there is not
any plastic strain point in the system. So, all points are settled in the elastic region of
the stress-strain curve which means all strains are below the 0.02 strain limit. Since
elastic strains do not deform the body permanently, design and material selection is
safe to use for this application.
31
Figure 2.48: Total deformation on the linear motor system.
Figure 2.49: Total deformation on the linear motor system.
Durability Analysis
Since 1 bar pressure will be preferred in the competition, all analyses are performed
in this condition. All structural analyses are also carried out for conditions of
acceleration and deceleration with varying forces.
32
All mass and forces are applied on carbon fiber epoxy chassis. In this condition for
crash analysis the chassis is chosen for the main component of the pod. Except for
the brake system, other interior components have only their mass as force. Because
of it they have a low effect on crash tests’ mechanical results and their masses were
added as mass to the chassis when it was analyzed with Solidworks.
According to the analysis of crash test chassis are made of carbon fiber- epoxy
composite. It has Poisson ratio 0.10, ultimate compression stress 570 MPa, Young’s
module 70 GPa. Also, it has 26 m/s velocity (maximum speed of pod) and 500
microsecond interaction time with a rigid plane.
Evaluation of the crash test was made on Von Mises criteria as seen in Figure 2.50.
At the last microsecond of the interaction time maximum stress on the chassis was
50 Mpa. Also according to the analysis result, in case of any collision chassis was
deformed until first levitation motors’ level.
Figure 2.50: Stress of chassis in crash test analysis
The strain of chassis and total displacement obtained 0.6 mm and 14 mm

respectively as seen in Figure 2.51. When thinking of the dangerous components’
location (electronic card and accumulators) In an unfavorable scenario, the pod can
be trusted.
33
Figure 2.51: The strain result of Chassis’ crash test analysis
3. Pod Power Consumption
Power consumption of the pod’s electronic components is considered below.
● IP CAM
5 𝑊 · 0. 16 ℎ = 0. 8 𝑊ℎ (used for 10 minutes)
● DSLIM
10800 𝑊 · 0. 083 ℎ = 747 𝑊ℎ (used for 5 minutes)
● Levitation Motor / Antigravity MN5008 KV400 (x4)
● Arduino Due (x2)
● Raspberry Pi 3B+
25. 5 𝑊 · 0. 33 ℎ = 8. 4 𝑊ℎ (used for 20 minutes)
● Network Access Module
34
● Brake Motor / Nema 34 - 86HS85 / CWD 860 Microstep Driver
● Pixhawk 2.4.8
2. 5 𝑊 · 0. 33 ℎ = 0. 82 𝑊ℎ (used for 20 minutes)
Table 3.1: Total electrical energy consumption of the pod.
As a result, total energy consumption is found as 941.35 Wh.
4. Energy Sources on the Pod
Three different Li-Po (Lithium-Polymer) battery packs are used due to the large
voltage requirement difference of electronic components. Battery packs for different
purposes are shown in Figure 4.1. There is no energy source other than voltage
sources.
Figure 4.1: Battery packs for different purposes.
35
4.1 Features of the Battery Packs
4.1.1 Dimensions and 3D drawing
Profuse 8000 mAh 2S1P 40 C Lipo Pack

Dimensions: 140x47x26 mm
Balance Plug: JST-XH
Discharge plug: XT-90
Mass: 335 gr
Profuse 6200 mAh 6S1P 45 C Lipo Pack

Balance Plug: JST-XH
Mass: 914 gr
JetFire 22000 mAh 12S1P 30 C Lipo Pack

Balance Plug: JST-XHR
Mass: 5204 gr
Size information of the Li-Po batteries are also given in Figure 4.2.
Figure 4.2: 3D models and sizes of the battery packs.
36
Figure 4.3: Size and positioning of the battery packs.
4.1.2 Battery Position on the Pod
Battery is located at the back side of the pod in case of an unexpected crash (see
Figure 4.4).
Figure 4.4: Positions of the battery packs on the pod.
4.1.3 Used Materials and Properties
Since desired air pressure will be 1 atm in the competition to avoid any malfunction
for the first try, no airtight case is used for the battery packs. Yet, a hard-to-grow
alucobond shield is used for emergency cases.
37
4.2 Electrical Specifications of Battery Pack
4.2.1 The Chemistry and Electrical Features of the Battery Pack
Cells of the batteries are made of Lithium Cobalt Oxide (𝐿𝑖𝐶𝑜𝑂

2
) cathode material.
The voltage of a single Li-Po cell lithium-metal-oxide varies from 4.2 V (fully charged)
to 2.7 V (fully discharged), where the nominal value is 3.7 V.
Figure 4.5: Volumetric and gravimetric energy densities of cathode materials for lithium
batteries [2].
Figure 4.5 indicates that Li-Po batteries have lighter weight and smaller size than
most of the other lithium batteries. In case of the designed pod’s size limitation this is
a useful characteristic. During the discharge, voltage ratings should be monitored in
order to prevent over-discharging and permanent damage to the cells. Usually the
last 20% of the total capacity should not be discharged in order to prevent damage
which is also shown in Figure 4.6.
Figure 4.6: Discharge curve for a lithium battery [3].
38
4.2.2 Number of Cells and Cell Configuration
Individually connected cells in series 2S, 6S and 12S Li-Po batteries are used as
stated in Figure 4.1.
4.2.3 Energy and Power Specifications of Battery Pack
Table 4.1: List of the energy sources on the pod.
The 8000 mAh 2S 40 C battery is preferred in order to power the 2 Arduino Due,
Raspberry Pi Model 3B+ and Pixhawk 2.4.8 for 20 minutes. In total, the components
consume 11 A continuously. The battery can supply up to 320 A continuously since it
has a 40 C discharge rating. The 8000 mAh battery can supply 480 A/min. If 80% is
considered, the battery can supply 384 A/min. The battery can supply the
components even for 34 minutes. During the discharge, it consumes 3600 mAh. The
battery can power the components for 20 minutes without causing any permanent
damage. This battery has 59.2 Wh energy. As stated in Figure 4.1 and Table 3.1,
48.82 Wh energy is required for these electronics, which is satisfied by this battery
pack.
The 22000 mAh 12S 30 C battery is preferred in order to power the DSLIM and
Brake Motors for 5 minutes. The DSLIM consumes 130 A and Brake Motors
consumes 20 A continuously. In total, the components consume 150 A continuously.
The battery can supply up to 660 A continuously since it has a 30 C discharge rating.
The 22000 mAh battery can supply 1320 A/min. If 80% is considered, the battery can
supply 1056 A/min. The battery can supply the components even for 7 minutes
without causing any permanent damage. During the 5 minutes of discharge, it
consumes 12500 mAh. This battery has 976.8 Wh energy. As stated in Figure 4.1
and Table 3.1, 805.93 Wh energy is required for DSLIM and Brake Motors, which is
satisfied by this battery pack.
The 6200 mAh 6S 45 C battery is preferred in order to have a 2 minutes discharge

time for levitation motors, 10 minutes discharge time for IP-CAM and 20 minutes
discharge time for NAM. The 4 Levitation Motors consumes 140 A, IP-CAM
consumes 0.4 A and NAM consumes 3 A continuously. The battery can supply up to
280 A continuously since it has a 45 C discharge rating. The 6200 mAh battery can
39
supply 372 A/min. If 80% is considered, the battery can supply 298 A/min. The
battery can supply the 4 Levitation Motors for 2 minutes, IP-CAM for 10 minutes and
NAM for 20 minutes. During the discharge, it consumes 5600 mAh. The battery can
power the mentioned components for 8 minutes without causing any permanent
damage. This battery has 137.64 Wh energy. As stated in Figure 4.1 and Table 3.1,
119.6 Wh energy is required for these electronics, which is satisfied by this battery
pack.
Batteries will be charging in the competition zone with LiPro Balance Charger. This
charger is used for 2S-6S Li-Po batteries directly with a 12 V adapter. All batteries
will be charging with maximum 1C. The 12S battery will be charged separately, 6S
and other 6S. This charger’s maximum charging current is 6 A. There will be two
chargers in the competition.
4.3 Security
4.3.1 Battery Management System Features
The Battery Management System is a sub-unit that provides protection by

continuously monitoring the temperature, voltage and current values of the battery
packs in order to keep the battery pack in a safe working area.
The BMS is designed to have as many channels as the number of batteries. The
block diagram of the battery management system designed to collect current and
voltage data to ensure the safety of the battery pack and to create the SoC algorithm
is given in Figure 4.7.
40
Figure 4.7: Block diagram of battery management system.
4.3.1.1 Input - Output Connectors
Figure 4.8: XT60 and XT90 power connectors.
High current capacity XT connectors with different current levels are used at the input
and output terminals of the battery management system as power connectors. If
there is a current above the calculated current value, it can be connected to the XT
pins with a cable.
41
Figure 4.9: Temperature sensors XH connectors.
Temperature sensor connections are provided with XH connectors for optional use.
Figure 4.10: Control outputs IDC connector.
The temperature, voltage and current data measured on the card, send signals to the
MOSFET trigger that turn the DC BUS on and off are carried out via the 2x8 IDC
connector.
4.3.1.2 Voltage Sensing

Voltage measurement is carried out through the designed voltage divider. In line with
the calculations, the 1 V change in the output will be reflected to the processor
analog inputs as 62 mV. For this reason, the processor will be able to read the
battery’s nominal and maximum voltage range within the analog data reading limits
without using op-amps.
42
Figure 4.11: Voltage divider.
A basic capacitor is also connected to the leg on which to take analog readings to
suppress unwanted noise. In order to reduce the current ratio in the voltage divider,
resistors at the level of kOhm are used.
4.3.1.3 Current Sensing
The current measurement application is used to follow the overcurrent limits

determined for the batteries used in the system. In addition, it is used as a part of the
SoC algorithm to be used to detect battery percentiles.
For the stated purposes, current sensors with suitable current measurement capacity
are used for each battery pack. The current sensors used are at 200 A and 5 A
levels.
43
Figure 4.12: Schematic design of a typical current sensor.
The current sensor whose schematic design is given in Figure 4.12 is

ACS758ECB-200B with 200 A current capacity. The power inputs are 5 V and the
output offset voltage is 2.5 V.
The 5 V power input of the sensor is bypassed with a capacity of 0.1µF. The Vout pin
is filtered with a 100 Ohm 10nF low-pass RC filter with a corner frequency of 168
kHz. Measurement errors that may occur during testing may cause corner frequency
changes. Current sensor output sensitivity is 10 mV/A.
4.3.1.4 MOSFETs as Power Switch
MOSFETs are used to transfer the battery energy to the load and to cut the load
energy. The topology used is Low-Side protection topology and the power switches
come after the load. In this way, no additional charge pump or bootstrap topology is
needed for MOSFET triggers.
The MOSFETs used for switching purposes are selected with a minimum current
capacity of 1.2 times the current capacity they will switch and at the appropriate
voltage level.
44
Figure 4.13: (a) Load switch MOSFET in 2S path, (b) MOSFETs in 6S path.
In order to increase the current capacity and to provide redundancy, parallel

MOSFETs are used in high current paths. In order to prevent load imbalance and
parallel oscillation that may occur in the parallel MOSFET connection configuration
and to prevent parasitic openings, a resistor is added between the gate-source, and
layout is designed with parasitic capacitances in mind.
Figure 4.14: MOSFETs in 12S path.
45
4.3.1.5 MOSFET Gate Drivers
It is seen that the 𝑉𝑔𝑠 voltages must be at least 6 V in order to transmit the
appropriate current levels in line with the datasheet data of the MOSFETs used in the
topology.
Figure 4.15: TLP250 gate driver.
Gate drivers make switching by moving the logic trigger signals sent for MOSFET
triggering to 12 V voltage level. In addition, the TLP250 given in Figure 4.15 provides
optical isolation and transmits gate signals in isolation. Thanks to the driver with 0.5
µs rise time, overcurrent protection can be made at the microsecond level.
The resistors used in the gate driver input have been created to ensure that they are
driven in a way that does not exceed the maximum input current. The resistors used
at the gate output have been chosen to prevent oscillation but the gate charging time
does not exceed the protection time.
4.3.1.6 Power Distribution
The BMS Board is designed to produce the needed voltage and power levels for
different systems. In addition, power outputs in buck converter topology, given in
Figure 4.16 and Figure 4.17, are designed to have 5V-3A and 12V-3A output
channels that other subsystems can use.
46
Figure 4.16: 12V regulation channel.
It is known that the voltage levels of batteries change during discharge and charge.
For this reason, fixed output Buck Regulators are used to prevent the calculated
output voltages from passing the Controller and IC supply voltages to the Under
Voltage Lock Out state due to this change.
Figure 4.17: 5V regulation channel.
4.3.1.7 Battery Management System Preview
In the PCB layout design given in Figure 4.18, the signal paths were taken to the
points where they were carried by the shortest route and were filtered with an RC
filter at the points coming out of the card.
47
Figure 4.18: 3D preview of BMS board.
Current flow paths are combined between polygons with the stitch method to
increase the current capacity. In order to increase the current capacity in case of
need, it is designed to increase the current carrying capacity by melting solder on the
roads with the TOP SOLDER layer.
Figure 4.19: (a) XT connectors, (b) Temperature sensor inputs.
Figure 4.20: ACS758-200B current sensor.
48
Figure 4.21: 16 Pin IDC connector.
Figure 4.22: Power distribution area.
4.3.2 Placement of Temperature Sensors
Temperature is a factor that can create a safety problem in Li-Po batteries, as in

other batteries. In the literature, the range of -20 and 60 ℃ is specified as the safe
operating zone. In the system used in the vehicle, 50 ℃ is determined as the
temperature warning, and 65 ℃ as the system shutdown limit.
49
The Battery Management system is designed to read four temperature data. Three
sensors will be connected to the battery packs and one will be fixed on the card to
monitor the temperature of the BMS card. The sensors to be used are shown in
Figure 4.23.
Figure 4.23: NTC temperature sensors.
4.3.3 Safety Equipment (contactor, fuse, etc.)

System short circuit protections will be made by using manual cutter blade fuses of
different values for each battery pack external to the BMS board.
Overcurrent protection is made with a parallel connected MOSFET group that can
protect at microsecond levels designed on the BMS board.
Figure 4.24: Blade MIDI fuse.
50
4.3.4 Security Algorithm Details
The safety algorithm is activated when the battery pack goes outside the
user-specified safety limits. Fault condition occurs when at least one security breach
occurs. During the fault, the MOSFET groups that energize the loads are taken to the
cutoff and the load energy is cut.
Since the sources feeding the current and voltage sensors are not affected by the
cut-off status, the fault status continues to be monitored.
Figure 4.25: Protection algorithm.
51
5. Pod Navigation System and Sensor Information
UI Computer: The computer that the team will use outside the tunnel to control the
pod and observe data.
➔ Master Computer: Raspberry Pi 3 Model B+ 1GB RAM
◆ Sensor Arduino: Arduino Due
● Reflector Detection: Waveshare Laser Module x5
● Tachometer (Navigation Back-up): TCRT5000
● Temperature: MPU6050 & NTC Thermistor
● IMU: MPU6050
● Height IR: TCRT5000
● Current Sensor: ACS758-200B
● Camera Module: Hilook IPC-T220H-F
◆ Driver Arduino: Arduino Due
● Driver: Custom made
● LIM: Linear Induction Motor
● Brake Motor: Step Motor Nema 34 - 86HS85
◆ Flight Controller: Pixhawk 2.4.8
● Speed Controller: T-Motor Air 40A 600Hz ESC
● Levitation Motors: Antigravity MN5008 KV400, T Motor
In order to collect data from the environment, control the pod properly and meet the
conditions of the competition, seven sensors are used in the electronics system of
the pod. Among the data to be collected, there are temperature, rpm, current (to
control overcurrent limit for batteries), acceleration, vertical displacement of the pod
(displacement caused by levitation), also velocity, and displacement data measured
from the reflectors. To collect these data, five different sensors are used in the
communication and electronics system of the pod. These are; an IMU (Inertial
52
Measurement Unit) for its embedded accelerometer, gyroscope, and temperature
sensor, four NTC thermistors, two TCRT5000 IR sensors, four current sensors, and
five laser modules. Detailed information about the sensors, their working principle,
and the process of transferring and processing of the data can be found in the
following sections.
After the sensors and the components that are used for the sensors and navigation
system are decided, to have a general idea for sensors’ connections and having a
control and understanding over analog and digital pin numbers, a circuit schematic
with Sensor Arduino and sensors only without four temperature and current sensors
controlled by BMS is made as seen in Figure 5.1.
Figure 5.1: Sensor Arduino circuit schematic with sensors.
Also, as seen in Table 5.1 number of sensors, their analog and digital pin numbers
are given as a table. Addition to these sensors there are four more temperature
sensors and four current sensors that are used via BMS and their analog and digital
pin usages for the Power Arduino can be seen in Table 5.2.
53
Table 5.1: Analog and digital pin requirements of the sensors in the pod for
Sensor Arduino.
Table 5.2: Analog and digital pin requirements of the sensors in the pod for
Power Arduino.
The positions of the electronics system with computers, sensors, and Pixhawk Flight
Controller which can be seen in Figure 5.2 represents the whole components that are
used to provide the necessities to obtain the tunnel conditions and control the pod in
the tunnel of the Hyperloop system. A system is implemented to control the two
Arduinos via a master computer Raspberry Pi 3 B+. Two Arduino Due will be used to
process the data from the sensors, control the driver, brake motors and complete the
communication of both Arduinos with the Master Computer. Arduino Due is chosen
due to its analog pin capacity and higher SRAM and higher flash memory compared
to Arduino Mega and Arduino Uno. Power Arduino (Arduino Due) is used to control
the linear induction motors via driver and to control the brake motors, also collecting
temperature information and controlling the current flow of the batteries via designed
BMS as explained in detail in Chapter 4.3. The Sensor Arduino is used to accomplish
the processing and transferring of the needed information collected from the sensors
such as temperature, velocity, rpm value for navigation system back-up and vertical
displacement (levitation) information obtained from reflectors, IR sensors, and an
IMU.
54
Figure 5.2: Position of the electronics on the pod.
5.1 Pod Navigation System
In order to count the reflectors on the tunnel, several methods were implemented and
tested.
Firstly, an approach based on the laser and Light Dependent Resistor (LDR) is tried.
In that setup, the goal is to place the laser module that is connected to the Arduino at
a certain angle, then try to aim the laser reflected from the tunnel surface onto the
LDR. Since the reflection angle will be different in the microprismatic reflector and the
concrete surface, the idea is to count the reflectors through the change in the LDR
output values. Although this plan seems to be logical and easy to implement
theoretically, in practice it turned out that the placement angle of the laser module
needs to be arranged beforehand for every different surface that the laser beam will
be reflected on. The reason for this is that the reflection coefficient of every surface is
different, hence, in the case that mentioned setup is implemented for the competition,
the angle needs to be arranged according to the reflection coefficient of the tunnel
material. As can be understood from it, this is not appropriate for a designed system.
For this reason, it is decided to design another system to count reflectors.
Since it is hard to aim the laser beam onto the LDR due to specific angle
arrangements, using a system with a Light Emitting Diode (LED) instead of a laser
module and LDR has been considered. The idea is to count the reflectors by
detecting the intensity of the light that the surface reflected. The motivation of this
approach is that the output value read from the LDR for different surfaces will be
different since the intensity of the light reflected from the reflectors will be higher than
the intensity of the reflected light from the concrete surface. By detecting the change
in the LDR output values, the plan is to make an inference regarding whether the
light is reflected from the reflector or concrete. Therefore, a change in the output of
LDR values can be found. However, the option of using the system with LED and
LDR has been eliminated. The main reason for this is the short distance between the
reflectors and concrete and therefore the scattering light of LED hits both reflector
55
and concrete surfaces. So, the reflector counting accuracy didn’t meet the
expectations.
In the end, it is understood that a pre-prepared laser-based sensor module should be

implemented to detect and count the reflectors throughout the tunnel. As a result of
wide research related to the sensor models, the Waveshare Laser Module sensor is
found appropriate for the purpose of counting reflectors.
Also, the dimensions of the sensor device are 53 millimeters x 18 millimeters.To

mention the specific properties of the Waveshare Laser Module that is used to count
the reflector, its operating voltage is between 2.5 V - 5.0 V. The effective distance of
the sensor is between 0.6 meters and 1.5 meters. This range is quite satisfactory
because it is estimated that the maximum distance between the pod and the
reflectors on the surface will be around 0.8 meters.
Simply for the operation mechanism, the sensor emits the light from the transmitter
part of the sensor and receives the reflected light from the receiver side of the
sensor. The important point is that it only detects the light that is reflected from the
surface with the same frequency since the sensor uses modulation techniques. This
property of a sensor is important for navigation of the pod because it provides the
ability to ignore ambient light. In this way, only the reflected light can be considered.
The Nyquist rate suggests that the sampling frequency should be at least two times
higher than the highest frequency of a signal to process it with no aliasing. The
maximum sampling frequency of the Arduino Due (1 MHz for digital I/O) and since
the Waveshare laser module uses modulation processing technology the receiving
part only receives the reflected light in the same frequency as laser module which is
175 kHz, so the frequency of the reflectors, Arduino and the laser module sensor
meet the Nyquist rate needs when the pod reaches maximum speed of 26 m/s that is
520 Hz where the reflectors are the most frequent.
As shown in Figure 5.3 by using this sensor, the digital value of 1 is obtained when
the laser beam is confronted with a reflective surface, and value of 0 is obtained
when the laser falls into a non-reflective surface. With the necessary Arduino script, it
is observed that the sensor module works as expected under the lower speed
conditions. The estimated maximum speed is 26 m/s so, to avoid the wrong
measurements and wrong spikes in the output that may be caused by environmental
or other effects the minimum measurement time between two reflectors is limited to
0.1/26 seconds. The minimum distance between the beginning of two different
reflectors is 0.1 m and the estimated maximum speed is 26 m/s, so the time that is
measured between the beginning of two reflectors cannot be lower than 0.1/26 s.
Any time difference lower than this value is removed since there couldn’t be such a
time difference, and it is probably measured incorrectly. It is useful for the sake of
navigation of the pod because the maximum speed obtained by hand is 25 m/s with
56
the test system which can be seen in Figure 5.4. It is expected to work at almost the
same accuracy and consistency when the pod reaches desired speeds.
Figure 5.3: Digital output of reflector detection from Waveshare Laser Module in Arduino.
Figure 5.4: Microprismatic reflector test system.
To obtain the velocity information from the reflectors, an Arduino script will be
implemented. In the script, one variable keeps track of whether the new reflector is
detected after a concrete surface. When a reflector is detected for the first time, the
time is saved to the variable. On the other hand, another variable keeps track of the
previous reflector detection time. So that pod became able to detect the time
difference and send this information to the master computer as an output. Since the
time interval and the distance between the detectors are known, it is possible for the
master computer to calculate the velocity and displacement and use it in the
designed Graphical User Interface, and in other calculations. Important to mention, In
every reflector detection, this process repeats itself such that the time difference will
be sent to the master computer when a new reflector is passed; and a constant “0”
value will be sent when no reflector is passed at that particular time.
57
Figure 5.5: Placement of laser modules on the pod’s shell to detect reflectors.
Figure 5.6: Distance of five laser modules from the periphery of the tunnel to the pod in mm.
58
Figure 5.7: Angles between five laser modules and reflectors on the periphery of the tunnel.
Figure 5.8: Side view of the placement of five laser modules on the shell.
As it is required in the competition requirements, also as represented in Figure 5.5 to

Figure 5.8 the positioning angle, distance of the navigation sensors to the tunnel,
their locations on the pod and their maximum operating information can be seen.
This information is also given in Table 5.3. Since five laser modules are exactly the
same, maximum operating distances of five laser modules are the same based on
the datasheets. The minimum operating distance is 0.6m according to the
datasheets, so since the minimum distance is 64.5 cm for Laser module 1 and 5 it is
59
expected to face no problems for counting the reflectors, these are also tested. Since
these are laser modules, it may be expected to reflect or refract however based on
the tests that are done with 89.08°, 90°, and 73.20° were successful and both
counting the reflectors and obtaining the time difference between each reflector
accomplished.
Table 5.3: Positioning angle, position on the pod, distance to the periphery of the
tunnel, and maximum operating distance of navigation system sensors.
In dynamic systems that reach high velocities such as the pod that is designed for
this competition, it is always important to consider the possibility of bias that can
occur within the sensors. This error can be caused by environmental factors or by
internal factors such as high-frequency vibrations within the dynamic system. The
possibility of error in some sensors that have less importance might be ignored or
covered rapidly, but this possibility carries great importance in the sensors that are
crucial for the system. In the pod that is designed for competition, Waveshare Laser
Sensor can be counted as one of the most important sensors due to its high
importance in the navigation of the pod. Any error in the navigation information can
cause immediate errors in other parts of the system.
So that, to make the navigation system reliable, it is decided to use more than one
Waveshare laser sensor in order to obtain the information of counted reflectors. 5
Laser Sensors are used throughout the system to make logical judgments related to
navigation based on the counted reflector number. Firstly, it is highly expected that
the same information will be reached from the values collected from all of the sensors
since all of the calculations and arrangements related to laser sensors are already
made accordingly. However, in the case that different information is reached from
different sensors, the judgment will be solely based on the reflector number. For
example, considering the extreme case, if sensors give different information, the true
information will be taken as the information that is given by the majority of the
sensors. For example, if 3 sensors give X counted reflectors information, and 2
sensors give Y, the counted reflector number will be considered as X. In addition to
that, if less than 3 of the sensors give the same information, for example, 2 of them
give X, and other ones give A, B, C information; X will not be considered as a true
counted reflector number. In this case, it will be decided to use an additional control
mechanism designed with software to control the navigation of the pod through the
rest of the competition. As a result, by considering the mentioned information above,
60
it is expected that the navigation of the pod will be controlled successfully by using
Waveshare Laser Sensor and designed algorithms in the Arduino environment.
5.2 Tachometer
In order to obtain a better navigation system, a safety method other than the
navigation system with Waveshare Laser sensor is also designed. The reason to
design this safety system is to make sure that the pod will stop at the desired point
regardless of whether the navigation system with lasers worked or not. In this
system, a method is solely based on the distance that the wheel that is implemented
in the pod takes. Such that since the radius of the wheel on the pod is already
known, and the length of the tunnel and stopping point are also known, it might be a
good idea to check the stopping point by looking at the displacement of the wheel.
Mentioned wheel and its diameter can also be seen in Figure 5.9.
Figure 5.9: Mentioned wheel for navigation back-up system and its diameter in mm.
𝐶=2 · π· 𝑟 (5.1)
In this case, the radius of the wheel that is used for this operation is 14 mm. Since
the circumference of the is defined as (5.1), it can be said that the displacement
when the wheel is turned only once is 0.087 meters. So that, if the rotation number of
the wheel is known, then the displacement can be found with respect to the wheel on
the pod. To detect how many times the wheel is turned, a black mark is put on the
wheel as seen in Figure 5.10.
61
Figure 5.10: Placement of TCRT5000 as tachometer and wheel with black line.
By using the TCRT5000 IR sensor, simply, how many times the sensor reads the
black mark is found. So that the rotation number of the wheel is also found. After that
point, the only thing that needs to be done is to use (5.1) and find displacement.
Please note that, by using this method, the displacement is found with respect to the
specific location of the wheel on the pod. So that, for example, if the displacement of
the beginning of the pod is desired to be found and the wheel is located in the middle
of the pod, then half the length of the pod should be added to the number that is
found with (5.1). The same situation can be said as the full length of the pod should
be added to the found number if the wheel is located at the end of the pod.
According to the experiments, the laser sensor misses 4 out of every 100 reflectors.
In order to ensure that the sensors are working correctly, the probability of incorrect
reading of the whole system is calculated as follows, according to the rule of correct
operation of at least 3 sensors is the sum of the probability of all sensors reading
incorrectly and the probability of one sensor reading correctly and the probability of
two sensors reading correctly.:
5
𝑎 = 𝐶(5, 0) · (1/25)
4
𝑏 = 𝐶(5, 1) · (24/25) · (1/25)
2 3
𝑐 = 𝐶(5, 2) · (24/25) · (1/25)
𝑎 + 𝑏 + 𝑐 ≃ 0. 06%
62
Figure 5.11: Block diagram of the path to be followed if five laser sensors cannot read the
reflectors.
Despite this low probability, the tachometer system that controls this system has
been developed to ensure that the results are accurate. With this system, when the
laser sensors give a value of 0, the tachometer will be measured and it will be
checked whether the distance between the two reflectors has passed, and if it has
passed, information will be sent as if the reflectors have been read as seen in Figure
5.11.
63
Figure 5.12: Velocity graph at each reflector position and tolerance line.
In order to match the maximum speed by 5 percent, a border is drawn on the graph
showing how fast the sensor is in which reflector, and it is found that how many
reflectors were within this margin of error. Accordingly, sensors in 4 reflectors will be
able to measure this speed range as seen in Figure 5.12.
5.3 Temperature Sensors
As a temperature sensor LM35 was planned to be used in two different locations on

the pod through Arduino Due connections to provide the competition requirements. It
was planned as using LM35 temperature sensor and reading analog data from the
environment and by converting it into the Celcius proper calculations were made.
However, based on the simple tests that are done, the operating outputs and the
sensitivity of LM35 were not satisfactory. Since its lack of stability, both LM35
temperature sensor and its module are decided not to be used as temperature
sensor in the pod and competition. As it is mentioned before, MPU6050 will be used
for acceleration and gyroscope to calculate speed and position, MPU6050 also has
an embedded temperature sensor that can measure over the range of -40 ℃ to 85
℃. Based on the tests that are done, the outputs can be seen from Figure 5.13. It is
also tested by changing the environmental temperature and the performance of the
MPU6050’s temperature sensor was better than LM35. Since there is no problem
64
about the data transfer rate and performance quality of MPU6050 it will also be used
as a temperature sensor.
In addition to this there will be four more temperature sensors to measure three
battery packages (electronics, propulsion, levitation) and one for the BMS card. The
further information and explanation about these four temperature sensors are
mentioned in 1.3.8 Placement of Temperature Sensors under Chapter 4 Energy
Sources on The Pod. In summary, the requirement for at least two temperature
information from two different locations will be satisfied and also the temperature of
the battery packages will be under control throughout the competition.
Figure 5.13: MPU6050 Arduino output.
As it is mentioned before, five temperature sensors will be used, one is from

MPU6050’s embedded temperature sensor, four of them are controlled by BMS and
Power Arduino. Location of all five temperature sensors can be seen in Figure 5.14
and Figure 5.15
65
Figure 5.14: Placement of MPU6050 as one of the temperature sensors.
Figure 5.15: Placement of other four temperature sensors on the pod.
5.4 Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU)
In order to measure the acceleration and therefore, speed and position, an MPU6050
Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) which consists of an accelerometer and gyroscope
will be used through Sensor Arduino connection. MPU6050 is a six-axes IMU sensor
with a digital motion processor which can sense the movements in axes x, y, and z. It
means that the sensor gives six values as digital output: three from the
accelerometer’s x, y, z components, and three from the gyroscope’s x, y, and z
components. MPU6050 IMU has also a temperature sensor that measures the
66
temperature information to be used in the calculations required for the acceleration
measurement. To implement the MPU605 sensor to the electronics system and
obtained the gyroscope, IMU, accelerometer, and temperatures values; three Arduino
libraries are imported as Adafruit_MPU6050.h, Adafruit_Sensor.h, and Wire.h. The
Arduino script with all sensors’ implementation will be working with 1000000 baud
rate (Bd). Then accelerometer, gyroscope, and filter bandwidths are set to make
MPU6050 work. In the output, there are six outputs that are obtained as three
rotational velocity values from the gyroscope, and three linear acceleration values
from the accelerometer. The output format that is seen in the general Arduino text
with all sensors can be seen in the following and also seen in Figure 5.16. This type
of format that consists of every sensor information separated by “/” is chosen to make
the analysis and calculations in the master computer and UI easier. By sending a
stable and constant output format the process of interpretation and calculations
becomes faster and easier to separate and group.
Figure 5.16: Sensor Arduino output format
The format in Figure 5.16 is taken from the sensors to communicate with the master
computer as in the following,
TimeDiff/AccelX/AccelY/AccelZ/RotationX/RotationY/RotationZ/Temper/VerticalDisplacement
𝑚
Here the unit of the acceleration values are 2 and the unit of rotational velocity
𝑠
values are 𝑟𝑎𝑑/𝑠 . In the temperature part, with the same baud rate and frequency
analog output of temperature is obtained. The unit of the temperature is ℃, and two
67
MPU6050 will be used to obtain the temperature data from two different locations.
Also the unit of the data obtained from TCRT5000 is mm. Since the Pixhawk Flight
Controller is used the acceleration and the temperature data is mainly used from the
MPU6050. Location of the MPU6050 on the pod can be seen from Figure 5.17 and
5.18 as a close view.
Figure 5.17: Position of the MPU6050 on the pod.
Figure 5.18: Close view of position of the MPU6050 on the pod.
68
5.5 Height IR Sensor
The height IR sensor is used to measure the height by checking for the reflected light
from two separate LEDs to be equal. The main objective is to measure the vertical
displacement that is caused by levitation. TCRT5000 IR sensor module will be used
to achieve this goal. This sensor is useful since its operating range is between 2 mm
and 15 mm, and the expected vertical displacement caused by the levitation is
approximately 5 mm as can be seen from the simulation results in Figure 6.5 By
converting the analog values obtained from the sensor into a distance value (mm) in
Arduino Due the vertical displacement is obtained and will be transferred to
Raspberry Pi. The TCRT5000 height IR sensor is placed on the chassis, as seen in
Figure 5.19, to be able to directly measure the vertical displacement from the
aluminum rail, there is 1 cm distance between the sensor and the bottom of the
chassis since the sensor’s effective measurement range starts from 1 cm.
Figure 5.19: Position of the TCRT5000 on the chassis: (a) Shaed view, (b) Wireframe view.
Levitation is a very crucial part of the Hyperloop system in order to reduce friction
and reach high speeds. But levitation distance from the ground of the tunnel should
be controlled. The reason for that is too much levitation from the surface might cause
instability problems in the pod such that the pod can fail. Or too low levitation may
cause the pod to contact with the surface such that reaching high speeds might
become difficult due to friction.
In order to measure the distance between the ground and the pod that is caused by
the levitation, the TCRT5000 distance sensor is employed. As for any other sensors,
TCRT5000 gives us an analog output between 0-1023 values according to the
distance from the surface. One problem that is encountered with the TCRT5000 is
that the analog output of the sensor is not directly proportional to the real distance
value. For example, in several experiments that are conducted to analyze the
behavior of TCRT5000, it is observed that as measured distance increases linearly
from 1 cm to 2 cm, the analog output of the sensor starts to increase slowly in higher
analog values. As an example, when analog output increases 100 to 300 very rapidly,
69
it increases 800 to 900 very slowly. So, analog output could not directly relate to the
real distance that is measured.
In order to solve this problem, an experimental approach based on the collection of

the analog output based on the measured distance values is employed. In this
approach, starting from the 1 cm distance, the analog output equivalent to each
distance value is recorded. Important to mention that sensitivity of this approach was
taken as 0.1 centimeters as analog values recorded for every 0.1 centimeters such
as 1.1 cm, 1.2 cm, 1.3 cm, up to 2 centimeters. After that, if-else structure is
designed in the Arduino environment to relate distance values to their equivalent
analog output values. As a result, TCRT5000 output values are arranged to obtain
logical results for the mentioned particular application needs.
In Figure 5.20 below, measured distance values and corresponding analog output
values can be seen in different experiments. As more or less the same results were
obtained in every experiment with different surfaces, it can be said that the approach is
reliable.
Figure 5.20: Measured Distance vs. Analog Output of TCRT5000.
70
5.6 Current Sensor
Figure 5.21: Current Sensors : (a) ACS758-200B (b) ACS758-05B
The system current level is a variable that must be kept under control. Therefore,
current measurement accuracy is important. Hall-effect based current sensors with
different output sensitivities were used in the application.
The ACS758-200B sensor has an output voltage of. In addition, it has a bandwidth of
120 kHz and a contact resistance of 100 µOhm. For this reason, ACS758-200B
bidirectional current measuring current sensor is used in the measurements of high
current lines.
ACS712-05B is used to measure the currents of low-level lines; it has 185 mV/A
output voltage, 80 kHz frequency band and 1.2 Ohm contact resistance.
5.7 Shielding
Shielding is particularly important since the sensors will be affected by the magnetic
field occurring during travel. In order to prevent the affection, an alucobond material
is used for shielding. Alucobond contains aluminum which is used for
electromagnetic shielding. In addition, it contains PVC, polyvinyl chloride that is a
fire-resistant material. In case of fire, electronic materials will be protected as PVC
does not burn easily.
6. Pod Levitation System

Friction force between the pod’s wheels and aluminum plate is one of the speed
limiters in the tunnel which shall be overcome. There are three common ways to
levitate the pod.
● Air bearings
● Passive magnetic levitation
● Active magnetic levitation
71
The first concept that is eliminated is “air bearings” due to 0.1 bar air pressure may
cause unexpected behavior on gas tanks and there is no one who has previous
practical knowledge about fluid dynamics in the team.
Physics that lies behind the passive and active magnetic levitation systems have only
slight differences. Changing the magnetic field near a conductor causes eddy
currents on the conductor plate. These eddy currents produce their own magnetic
field mirrored to the source magnetic field.
For a passive levitation system, this “changing magnetic field” in the concept is
produced by the permanent magnets that are moving through the tunnel at high
speed.
In contrast, an active levitation system does not need linear speed to levitate. In this
concept, the pod has four levitation motors which can be BLstep motors and their
angular velocity is the reason for “changing magnetic field” now. So that the pod can
levitate even though its speed is 0 m/s. (see Figure 6.1) [4].
Figure 6.1: Shows the characteristics of passive and active levitation.[4]
As the pod’s speed goal is 36 m/s, Figure 6.1 shows that it is not efficient to prefer a
passive levitation system for a 178 meter tunnel because it is possible to finish the
path even without levitating according to the pod's weight. Figure is plotted by using
equivalent variables such as magnets’ magnetic fields.
Also, when drag force caused by the permanent magnets is considered, it becomes
more and more preferable to use an active levitation system to levitate the pod since
72
it experiences less drag force while motors are rotating at 750 rpm. (see Figure 6.2)
[4]
Figure 6.2: The characteristics of passive and active levitation. [4]
Table 6.1: A comparison between active and passive levitation systems.
When all the things that are stated in Table 6.1 are taken into account, the chosen
levitation system is an active levitation system.
Lift force the pod will experience is simulated by using Ansys Maxwell. Halbach array
is used to arrange neodymium magnets. That is simply a way to strengthen the
magnetic field in the required direction. (see Figure 6.3)
73
Figure 6.3: Halbach array.
Figure 6.4 shows the magnetic field dispersion difference between two concepts.
Figure 6.4: Magnetic field dispersion: (a) One-way arranged magnets, (b) Halbach array
magnets.
After the halbach array circular shape magnet arrangement is completed, lift force
generated by this form while rotating at 750 rpm on an aluminum plate which has
12.7 cm height is analyzed in many different scales of the magnet array.
Figure 6.5: Distance between the magnets and aluminum plate.
When the pod is at a stop, the distance between the magnets and aluminum plate is
5 mm and the desired air gap between the wheels and aluminum plate is also 5 mm
in cruise. Thus, all the following analyses are for 1 cm air gap (see Figure 6.5).
74
Figure 6.6: Position of the levitation magnets on the pod.
Housing for the magnets gets over the aluminum plate a little bit but the magnets are
5 mm inside of the aluminum plate. In Figure 6.6, it is shown that nothing is in the
forbidden zone and magnets are 5 mm away from the aluminum rail, so that any
friction is expected.
Figure 6.7: Isometric view of the levitation magnets on the pod.
75
Figure 6.8: Top view of the levitation magnets on the pod.
Magnetic flux density on the aluminum plate generated by eddy currents can be seen
in Figure 6.9 at 5000 rpm. Highest flux density is generated directly under the magnet
arrays and saturation case is considered in Figure 6.12.
Figure 6.9: Magnetic flux density of the aluminum plate under rotating magnets.
Different sizes of magnet arrays have been analyzed. As it can be seen in Figure
6.10, the wider the magnets get the greater lift force they experience.
76
Figure 6.10 and Figure 6.11 below shows the effects of the magnet arrays’ size on
the lift force.
Figure 6.10: Diameter vs Lift Force (500 rpm, 2 cm magnet height, 1 cm air gap)
Figure 6.11: Magnet Height vs Lift Force (500 rpm, 1 cm air gap)
In Figure 6.11, two different magnet arrays are examined. One has 16 cm diameter
and the other one has 18 cm diameter. It is obvious that when the larger magnets are
used to levitate the pod, the greater lift force it experiences but it converges to a
saturation.
77
Figure 6.12: RPM vs Lift Force (12 cm diameter, 1 cm air gap, 1.5 cm magnet height)
The reason for simulating the configuration in Figure 6.12 is that the question “Can it
be levitated with a small magnet array but higher rpm?”. The answer is yes, but it
converges to a saturation value also.
All the values are for only one levitation motor. As the pod’s estimated weight is 50
kg, with a safety factor, 12 cm diameter, 1.5 cm height, a neodymium magnet array
will be used around 2500 rpm. In Figure 6.13 below, lift force at 5000 rpm for the
chosen size is analyzed, and 251 N lift force is obtained from one motor.
78
Figure 6.13: Lift Force vs Time (12 cm diameter, 1 cm air gap, 1.5 cm magnet height)
In order to provide the levitation system to rotate, required torque and power must be
satisfied. The equations are as follows:
Δω ω𝐹−ω𝑖 261.8 𝑟𝑎𝑑/𝑠−0 2

𝑎= Δ𝑡
= 𝑡𝑓−𝑡𝑖
= 1𝑠−0
= 261. 8 𝑟𝑎𝑑/𝑠 (6.1)
(6.1) is the acceleration formula where Δω is the change of the rotational velocity and
Δ𝑡 is the time change.
𝐼=
πρℎ
12 ( 4 4
)
[3 𝑟2 − 𝑟1 + ℎ 𝑟2 − 𝑟1 ]
2
( 2 2
) (6.2)
(6.2) is the moment of inertia formula where the ρ is the density of the magnets, 𝑟2 is
the outer diameter, 𝑟1 is the inner diameter and h is the height of the Halbach array.
2
𝐼 = 0. 000839 𝑘𝑔· 𝑚 (6.3)
3
The result is obtained from (6.2) where the density is 7600 𝑘𝑔/𝑚 , outer diameter is
0. 055 𝑚, inner diameter is 0. 005 𝑚 and the height is 0. 015 𝑚.
2 2
𝑇 = 𝐼⋅𝑎 = (0. 000839 𝑘𝑔 · 𝑚 ) · (261. 8 𝑟𝑎𝑑/𝑠 ) = 0. 2197 𝑁 · 𝑚 (6.4)
79
(6.4) is the torque formula where 𝐼 is the moment of inertia and 𝑎 is the acceleration.
𝑃𝑚 = 𝑇⋅ω = (0. 2197𝑁 · 𝑚) · (261. 8 𝑟𝑎𝑑/𝑠) = 57. 5 𝑊 (6.5)
(6.5) is the mechanical power formula where ω is the angular velocity.
As calculated above, the required power to overcome the magnet arrays’ inertia is 60
W. For the system to rotate T-Motor MN5008 series has been selected which can
provide 800 W. The main reason for choosing this motor is that it works very
efficiently at high speeds and low amperage.
By using (6.6), where 𝑄 is energy, 𝑚 is mass, 𝑐 is specific heat capacity and
∆𝑇 is temperature change, total energy which is transformed to heat is considered.
𝑄 = 𝑚 · 𝑐 · ∆𝑇 (6.6)
Since the designed levitation system causes a mechanical work of 2.94 Joules
(𝑊 = 𝐹 · 𝑥 → 2. 94 = 60 𝑁 · 0. 005 𝑚), this energy is considered as heat. When
(6.6) is solved with the stated values above, (6.7) is obtained.
3 3 𝐽
2. 94 𝐽𝑜𝑢𝑙𝑒𝑠 = 2700 𝑘𝑔/𝑚 · 0, 00014351 𝑚 · 950 𝑘𝑔·𝐾
· ∆𝑇 (6.7)
In (6.7), 𝑚 is considered as a part of an aluminum plate’s mass which is surrounded

by the projection of magnet arrays in the z axis (see Figure 6.14) and it is calculated
by using (7.5). Value of 𝑠 in (6.8) is found by considering the travel time for magnet
arrays to take a distance of its own length that is shown in Figure 6.15.
Figure 6.14: Magnet array’s projection on aluminum rail.
80
Figure 6.15: The most heated area when the magnets take a distance of its own length.
(6.6) is also followed in “Pod Propulsion System” for 1440 J and maximum
temperature rise is found as 2.06 K or ℃. In the magnetic levitation case, when the
same steps are followed and calculations are made, aluminum is never expected to
experience a temperature rise more than 30 ℃. For more details, see related parts of
“Pod Propulsion System”.
Since the pod has 60 kg mass which has the weight of 588 N and results of the
analysis can satisfy the need of levitation for 5 mm, it becomes the final design of
magnet arrays.
Mechanical analyses of the levitation system are mentioned in Section 2.
7. Pod Propulsion System
As told in the progress report, a 3-phase double sided linear induction motor (DSLIM)
is used for propulsion. Main goal was to reach 36 m/s speed. To achieve this mission,
required linear force is calculated considering the pod's mass, maximum braking
force and speed goal (see Appendix A.1). As a result, plots in Figure 7.1 are
obtained.
81
Figure 7.1: Estimated motion plots of the pod.
Since the calculated linear force is 300 N and the pod's speed goal is 36 m/s,
required electrical power for the linear motor is obtained in (7.1).
10. 8 𝑘𝑊 = 300 𝑁 · 36 𝑚/𝑠 (7.1)
10.8 kW is the power of two motors. To find how much current will flow through the
windings, (7.2) is solved.
5.4 𝑘𝑊
= 65 𝐴𝑟𝑚𝑠 (7.2)
3·48 𝑉
Then, cross-sectional area of a single copper wire is found as while it is able to carry
the stated current value without a deformation where I is the current, J is the current
density and 𝐴𝑤 is the cross-sectional area of wire, see (7.3). Since the cruise is really
2
short, J value is considered as 14 𝐴/𝑚𝑚 .
𝐼
𝐴𝑤 = 𝐽
(7.3)
After (7.3) is solved for the stated values above, the diameter of a copper wire is
found as 2.4 mm.
To find the frequency of the excitations, (7.4) is followed. Where 𝑣𝑠 is the

synchronous speed, τ𝑝 is the pole pitch and 𝑓 is the frequency.
82
𝑣𝑠 = 2 · τ 𝑝 · 𝑓 (7.4)
Required frequency is found as 150 Hz from (7.4) since it is a 4 pole motor (see
Figure 7.3).
Following these steps, many iterations are made considering thrust force, magnetic
saturation, thermal activities and power consumption, the design stated in Figure 7.2
is decided to be used, a 4-pole DSLIM. In Figure 7.2, wires occupied the forbidden
zone but this is the only way to model a wire for LIM in Ansys Maxwell 3D. In the
competition, wires will not be in the forbidden zone.
Figure 7.2: Isometric view of designed DSLIM.
Figure 7.3: Poles of the linear motor are shown.
83
At the end of the iterations, the winding number is decided as 66. For these
conditions, the magnetic saturation case is examined and Figure 7.4 is obtained.
Figure 7.4: Magnetic flux density of DSLIM.
Linear force is simulated on Ansys Maxwell 3D for 1 mm air gap with the mesh
operations that is shown in Figure 7.5 and Figure 7.6. Faces where force is
generated and the air gap is divided into more elements for more accurate solution.
Figure 7.5: Mesh operation for faces.
84
Figure 7.6: Mesh operation for air gap.
Figure 7.7: Showing mesh operation for all materials that is focused on the gap where force
is generated.
Analyses are made with laminated M270 35A core material with a stacking factor of
0.95.
When the motor mass is also considered for maximum speed, the most effective
linear force is about 260 N that is shown in Figure 7.7.
85
Figure 7.8: Linear force versus time.
Technical drawing of the designed linear induction motor is given in Figure 7.8.
Figure 7.9: Technical drawings of DSLIM.
The mass of each LIM is 12.5 kg. In total, the mass of DSLIM is 25 kg. It is found by
using (7.5) where 𝑚 is mass, 𝑑 is density which is stated in the datasheet of the core
material and 𝑣 is volume. Moreover, a Python script that is used for calculation of
mass is shared in Appendix A.3. Also, the battery for the propulsion system is 5.2 kg,
which makes the total mass of the propulsion system to be 30.2 kg.
𝑚 = 𝑑 ·𝑣 (7.5)
Calculated linear force was 300 N. However, the result obtained from Ansys Maxwell
was approximately 260 N. The difference between calculated and simulated results
occurs because there will be a loss which emerges as heat.
86
By using (7.6), where 𝑄 is energy, 𝑚 is mass, 𝑐 is specific heat capacity and
∆𝑇 is temperature change, total energy which is transformed to heat is considered.
𝑄 = 𝑚 · 𝑐 · ∆𝑇 (7.6)
Since the designed motor requires 10.8 kW electrical power but only can generate
260 N linear force which is equivalent power of 9.36 kW and less than the wanted
value, the energy difference between this electrical and mechanical power is
considered as heat. When (7.6) is solved with the stated values above, (7.7) is
obtained since 𝑊𝑎𝑡𝑡 = 𝐽𝑜𝑢𝑙𝑒 / 𝑠.
3 3 𝐽
1440 𝑊 · 0, 53 𝑠 = 2700 𝑘𝑔/𝑚 · 0, 000160272 𝑚 · 950 𝑘𝑔·𝐾
· ∆𝑇 (7.7)
In (7.7), 𝑚 is considered as a part of aluminum rail’s mass which is surrounded by the

projection of DSLIM in y axis (see Figure 7.9) and it is calculated by using (7.5).
Value of 𝑠 is found by considering the travel time for DSLIM to take a distance of its
own length that is shown in Figure 7.10.
Figure 7.10: Motor’s projection on aluminum rail.
87
Figure 7.11: Motor’s position versus time.
Since a partial calculation is made, every single position of DSLIM is considered.

When the motor takes a distance of its own length, maximum temperature rise is
expected to happen in between its current position and the previous position that is
before the distance is taken (see Figure 7.11).
Figure 7.12: The most heated area when the motor takes a distance of its own length.
When (7.7) is solved for ∆𝑇, temperature rise turns out to be 2.06 K or ℃.
7.1. Linear Induction Motor Driver
The motor driver is a sub-unit developed to control the speed and linear force of
linear induction motors. The motor driver has been designed for inverting a 50 VDC
battery into 3-phase 120° phase shifted sine signals.
The designed drive is based on the basic inverter topology and the hardware design
of the topology is explained in this section.
88
Figure 7.13: Schematic design of the motor driver.
In the schematic design given in Figure 7.13, IXFA180N10T2 N-Channel MOSFETs

are used for switching. If the power of the motor is considered as 10.8 kW,
approximately 65 Ampere current will occur per phase. To maintain the driving
process safe and sustainable, parameters of the MOSFETs are chosen with
attention.
In this application driving MOSFETs have 100 V and 180 A operating conditions and
6 mOhm maximum 𝑅𝑑𝑠,𝑜𝑛 resistance. Consequently these MOSFETs are compatible
in this application with its low internal resistance and high current capabilities.
Since the motor driver operating frequency is 120 Hz, the oscillations that may occur
due to 𝐶𝑑𝑠 and 𝐶𝑔𝑠 parameters in the parallel connected MOSFET configuration will
be at a minimum level.
89
Figure 7.14: MOSFET gate driver IC.
Considering the operation peak and continuous current rates of the DSLIM
configuration, 250 A manual circuit breaker blade fuse is used for the short circuit
conditions.
On the other hand, DC BUS capacities, 3 parallel electrolytic capacities with 100 V,
4700 µF, 40 mOhm ESR are used in order to obtain the total capacity that can meet
the instantaneous current needs at 120 Hz operating frequency and to reduce the
ESR value.
Figure 7.15: Motor driver DC BUS.
90
Voltage range of MOSFET triggering signals received from the microcontroller is a
logic signal as 3.3V or 5V. In IXFA180N10T2's datasheet its clear that 𝑉𝑔𝑠 nominal
saturation voltage is 6V. It is important to drive the MOSFETs in saturation when
MOSFETs are in a high current range. So topology, used a gate driver IC to invert
these logic signals to +12V range.
Figure 7.16: Phase conflict condition short circuit current path.
Also the controller or IC must prevent short circuit conditions when switching the
inverter topology. In case of a possible phase conflict between the high and low gate
signals, the two switches can transmit at the same time, making the DC BUS
short-circuited.
Because of these reasons a dead time must be left between the high and low
signals. DRV833 Gate Driver IC has an internal 200 nanoseconds dead time. So it’s
expected to provide protection for the phase conflict conditions.
91
The inverter topology includes high and low side MOSFETs. Low side MOSFET
driving is not a problem for this application. But high side MOSFETs require special
driving methodes like a charge pump or bootstrap. DRV8300 IC is using the
bootstrap topology to drive high MOSFETs. So topology is using bootstrap diodes
and capacitances.
Figure 7.17: Bootstrap capacitors.
Figure 7.17 is showing the boot capacitors. Their capacitances have been selected
with the 𝑄𝑔𝑎𝑡𝑒 capacities in mind. IXFA180N10T2 MOSFETs has an individual 185 nC
total gate capacitance and for the 12 V gate drive supply it is required to use
−6
minimum 0. 15 𝑥 10 𝐹 capacitor for this application from (7.8).
𝑄=𝑉·𝐶 (7.8)
With this calculation it’s decided to use 1 µF capacitors.
Figure 7.18: Input capacitances of gate driver.
Figure 7.18 is showing the bypass and decoupling capacitors that have different
capacity ranges. In this application input capacitances are used for two reasons. First
reason is to provide an extended noise suppressing filter for the power supply of the
DRV8300. Second reason is to provide peak trigger currents from the capacity during
switching.
92
Figure 7.19: Internal voltage regulator.
Internal voltage regulator is providing power supply to the gate driver. DC BUS
voltage range is between 44-50 VDC. ZXTR2112FQ-7 IC regulates the main voltage
to fixed 12 V. Output capacitors of the regulator are increased due to maximum
output current 50 mA. In this way, output capacitances can source the instant high
current for a short time.
Figure 7.20: (a) PCB layout preview, (b) PCB 3D preview.
93
Figure 7.21: (a) Top layer, (b) Bottom layer
PCB layout has been designed through some considerations. The main problem is
carrying high currents in the PCB path without fuse currents occurring. PCB paths
are made with polygons to increase current capacity. But it is not enough for the
linear induction motor. So VIA stitch method is used to double current carrying paths
in PCB.
Figure 7.22: Top solder covered paths.
But with the light of some calculations this method is also not enough for some
causes. Hence, some high current paths covered with top solder layer to melding
solder to have a great current capacity.
94
Figure 7.23: Battery connection terminals.
XT-90 Connectors have 90A current capacity. For higher current driving an additional
battery high current connection terminal added to design. These two connections can
be used in parallel or direct connection with one of them.
Figure 7.24: (a) Capacitor placement, (b) MOSFET gate resistors.
In PCB Layout capacitor placements are made like shown in Figure 7.24. The
capacitors that are used as bypass and decoupling have been placed near the power
outputs and where to signal read.
In parallel operation of MOSFETs may cause parallel oscillation between gate

terminals. In layout design the main gate resistor is set as 20 Ohm and 5 Ohm
resistors are placed too close to the gate pin of each parallel MOSFETs.
95
8. Brake System of the Pod and Velocity Plots
The expected braking information of the pod is as follows:
Distance required for deceleration (𝑚): 73.49

Time required for deceleration (𝑠): 5.69
2
Deceleration (𝑚/𝑠 ): 4.56
The expected cruise scenario is as follows:
Figure 8.1: Position vs Time graph in normal scenario.
Figure 8.2: Velocity vs Time graph in normal scenario.
96
Figure 8.3: Velocity vs Position graph in normal scenario.
Figure 8.4: Acceleration vs Time graph in normal scenario.
In an emergency, the pod will brake with the highest force of 189 Newton, which does
not damage the rail. In the simulation, the scenario is planned according to
deceleration at the highest speed. At the highest speed, braking is performed at a
shorter distance of 17 m and in 1.2 seconds in the emergency scenario compared to
the normal scenario.
The expected emergency scenario is as follows in maximum speed:
97
Figure 8.5: Position vs Time graph in emergency scenario.
Figure 8.6: Velocity vs Time graph in emergency scenario.
8.1 Brake System Design and Calculations
Braking calculations are made by using Python and the code is explained in
Appendix A.1. The total force needed for braking is 366 Newton and the time needed
for braking is 5.64 seconds. Total braking force needed is applied from three different
sources. During braking, the induction motor will run in reverse direction and apply
the force in the opposite direction to the movement. The braking force applied by
induction motors is 260 Newton as mentioned before in the propulsion system
98
section. There is also a brake effect due to drag force that varies according to the
instant velocity. At the maximum velocity where the braking calculations are
conducted since it is the most crucial point and velocity is 26 m/s, the drag force is 16
Newton. The remaining braking force, 89.5 Newton, is provided by the mechanical
braking system.
Mechanical braking is provided by two braking systems as shown in Figure 8.7 by

pressing the upper side of the rail. They are positioned on the front and rear halves of
the chassis. Forbidden zone is shown with red hatched lines in figures that need to
be shown as shown in Figure 8.8.
Figure 8.7: Mechanical brake system during braking.
Figure 8.8: Forbidden zone.
Brake pads are settled on the top and bottom surfaces of the upper part of the rail.
One rectangular pad with dimensions of 100 mm x 130 mm is settled on the top
surface of the rail and two pads with dimensions of 100 mm x 36 mm are settled on
the bottom surface of the rail. For brake pads, silicon based material that has 0.45
friction coefficient with the rail material is selected. Since mechanical brake force
99
required is 89.5 Newton and friction coefficient is 0.45, normal force required for
desired deceleration is 198 Newton. This is applied by two brake systems. For one
brake system, 99 Newton normal force must be applied to the pads. One end of the
bars are linked with a spring that creates a force to make contact between pads and
rail. The other ends of the bars are connected to the motor. In emergency cases,
electricity is cut off and springs apply required braking force. The side view of the
settlement of the braking system during braking is shown in Figure 8.9 and the front
view of the settlement of the braking system during braking is shown in Figure 8.10.
Figure 8.9: Side view of the settlement of the braking system.
Figure 8.10: Front view of the settlement of the braking system.
The scissors mechanism powered by a step motor is used to provide movement of

the pads. Two bars are linked from the middle. One end of the bars are linked to the
wire that is connected to the rotor of the motor. These wires provide the connection
between motor and scissors mechanism. Since one brake system will provide 98
100
Newton normal force to the pads and there are two springs in one brake system, 49
Newton total force is required. Since pads are settled at the top and bottom of the
rail, 24.5 Newton spring force is required. This force results in 1884 Pa pressure from
large pads to the rail and 6805 Pa pressure from small pads to the rail. The spring
that has 80 mm unextended length is selected. When the step motor is turned off, the
length of the spring becomes 120 mm. The difference between these two lengths
which is 40 mm is the x value in (8.1) that provides the applied braking force from the
brake mechanism.
𝐹𝑠𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑔 = 𝑘 · 𝑥 (8.1)
where;
𝐹𝑠𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑔 is spring force,
𝑘 is spring constant,
𝑥 is the difference between unextended and extended lengths.
By applying this equation, spring constant is found as 612.5 N/m.
During the acceleration part of the motion, the brake motor is turned on and the rotor
rotates. This rotation causes wrapping of the wires and the separation of brake pads
with the rail. When the step motor is turned on, the wires are wrapped to the rotor
and the spring elongates 20 mm more. So, 𝑥 value in (3.19) becomes 140 mm which
is the maximum force required from motors used in the brake system. By applying
(3.19) with 60 mm 𝑥 value which is the length difference and 612.5 N/m spring
constant, maximum required force from the motor is found as 36.75 Newton. By
multiplying this value with the radius of the rotor, which is 6.5 mm, torque required by
motor is found as 2.38 N·m.
The maximum elongation of springs cuts off the contact between pads and rail. After
5 mm levitation is applied, the distance between lower pads and rail becomes 5 mm
and the distance between lower pads and rail becomes 5 mm as can be seen in
Figure 8.10. The side view of the settlement of the braking system during braking is
shown in Figure 8.12 and the front view of the settlement of the braking system
during braking is shown in Figure 8.13.
This braking system can also run in emergency cases since brake pads press rail
when the power is cut off and the brake motor shuts down.
101
Figure 8.11: Mechanical braking system when step motor is turned on.
Figure 8.12: Side view of the settlement of the braking system when the step motor
is turned on.
102
Figure 8.13: Front view of the settlement of the braking system when the step motor
is turned on.
8.2 Thermal analysis of braking system
To examine temperature distribution on the surface of the aluminum rail, finite

element analysis is carried out for the most critical distance of braking. ABAQUS
software is used to simulate the heat generated by the friction occurring during the
braking time. For the braking system, pads are considered to be at the bottom and
top sections of the aluminum rail. The geometry of the simulated model is illustrated
in Figure 8.14.
Figure 8.14: The geometry of the aluminum rail as well as braking pads.
Material properties as well as braking system specifications for heat transfer analysis
of present simulation are provided in Table 8.1. Initial temperature of the aluminum
rail is considered to be 35 ℃.
103
Table 8.1: Material properties and braking system specifications for heat transfer
analysis.
Aluminum Rubber Braking properties
Density (kg/m3) 2710 1100 Braking distance (m) 60
Conductivity (W/mk) 218 0.5 Braking time (s) 4.3
Elasticity (GPa) 68.9 0.0007 Maximum velocity (m/s) 28
Poisson’s ratio 0.33 0.45 Braking force (N) 189
Specific heat (J/kg.K) 895 1300 Pod weight (Kg) 60
To obtain accurate results for temperature distribution at the surface of aluminum rail,
mesh independency is performed and a finer mesh is used for finite element
analysis. Since there is a limitation for temperature increase at the surface of
aluminum rail up to 30 ℃ for this competition, the designing of braking system as well
as material properties of braking pads should satisfy increased temperature induced
by friction force. The simulation is done for different distances of the aluminum rail to
find the most critical area with higher temperature increases. Contour of temperature
distribution along the aluminum rail with higher values of temperature increase is
presented in Figure 8.15.
Figure 8.15: Contour of temperature distribution along the top section of aluminum rail.
To better extract maximum temperature values, a path is defined at the surface of

aluminum rail. Figure 8.16 represents the location of the starting and ending point of
this path.
104
Figure 8.16: The path defined to extract temperature values at the surface of aluminum rail.
Figure 8.17: Temperature values along the defined path at the surface of aluminum rail.
As it can be seen from this Figure 8.17, for the most critical area of aluminum rail,
maximum temperature rise is about 28 ℃ which is under the specified limit for the
present competition.
105
9. Pod Stability System
Stability is provided in two axes with 12 wheels as shown in Figure 9.1.
Figure 9.1: Stability system.
Four wheels will be settled on the sides of the chassis as shown in Figure 9.2 and
Figure 9.3 to restrict the movement and rotation in the yaw path (y-axis). These
wheels are settled with zero clearance and they will contact the rail during motion to
prevent the fluctuation in the y axis and provide constant y coordinates of the linear
induction motors during the motion since the distance between rail and linear
induction motor directly affects the force taken by induction. In theory, DSLIM can
handle the yaw stability of the pod by the vertically symmetrical force applied on the
rail. In case of any unexpected unstable conditions, wheels will take the place.
Rubber type material is selected for these wheels since it has lower hardness than
rail material to prevent deformations on the rail. Theoretically, no force in the y
direction is expected, however, due to vibrational effects, forces in this axis may
fluctuate and minor forces may occur. This fluctuation will not generate considerable
temperature increase since the normal force applied will be so low.
106
Figure 9.2: Stability wheels in the yaw path.
Figure 9.3: Front view of the stability wheels in the yaw path.
For the pitch and roll paths, Pixhawk 4 Flight Controller is used. This is simply an
electronic motor speed control system that works with
“Proportional-Integral-Derivative” (PID) control mechanism. It provides the needed
levitation distance between the pod and rail, also keeps it balanced by adjusting the
speed of the levitation motors. Additionally, when the vehicle is settled with turned-off
levitation motors, four wheels under the pod contact the surface of the aluminum
plate as it is shown in Figure 9.4 and 9.5. These wheels restrict the movement in the
z-axis.
107
Figure 9.4: Lower stability wheels in pitch and yaw paths.
Figure 9.5: Front view of the lower stability wheels in pitch and yaw paths.
On the other hand, additional four wheels are settled in the middle of the chassis as
shown in Figure 9.6 and 9.7. The distance between these wheels and the rail is 10
mm when levitation does not occur. When levitation occurs, the difference between
the surface and these four wheels becomes 5 mm.
108
Figure 9.6: Upper stability wheels in pitch and yaw paths.
Figure 9.7: Front view of the upper stability wheels in pitch and yaw paths.
Stability system provides zero motion tolerance in the y-axis and ±5 mm motion
tolerance in the z-axis.
109
10. Pod Heat Dispersion
Batteries and electronic cards are among the areas on the pod that are expected to
heat up. Battery temperatures are controlled by BMS and the relevant protection
algorithm is specified in the BMS safety title.
In addition to these, the temperature increases to be caused by the transmission and
switching losses caused by the MOSFETs on the card will be followed by the
temperature of the cooler connected to them. 110 ℃ is the safety limit, and 130 ℃
will be the trigger for thermal shutdown.
If an unexpectedly high temperature is observed, the system will stop itself thanks to
the BMS. If the system returns to its normal temperature, the BMS will reactivate
itself and the pod will be restored.
Since the pod will travel at 1 atm, vacuum will not be used. The airflow passing
through the cavity in the middle of the shell will apply cooling to the subsystems.
11. Pod Production Steps
Details of the sub-systems are considered below.
Figure 11.1: Access points to the brake systems.
Figure 11.2: Assembly of the brake system.
110
Figure 11.3: Technical drawing of the long shaft.
111
Figure 11.6: Technical drawing of the screw mount of the brake system.
Figure 11.7: Technical drawings of the mid shaft.
Figure 11.8: Technical drawings of the long holder arm.
112
Figure 11.9: Technical drawings of the short holder arm.
Figure 11.10: Technical drawings of the short shaft.
Figure 11.11: Technical drawings of the lower brake pad holder (a), lower brake pad (b).
113
Figure 11.12: Technical drawings of the lower brake pad holder.
Figure 11.13: Size of the brake motor.
Figure 11.14: Assembly of the levitation system.
114
Figure 11.15: Technical drawing of the levitation system’s top arm (a) and rotation ax (b).
Figure 11.16: Technical drawing of the bottom arm of the levitation system.
Figure 11.17: Technical drawing of the levitation system’s clamp (a), sizes of magnets (b).
115
Figure 11.18: Wheel configuration of the stabilization system.
Figure 11.19: Assembly of the y-axis lower stabilization system (a), technical drawing of the
wheel (b).
Figure 11.20: Technical drawing of the screw mount (a), technical drawing of the screw(b).
116

Figure 11.21: Side stabilization system (a), technical drawing of the side stabilization system
(b).
Figure 11.22: Y-axis upper stabilization system (a), technical drawing of the y-axis upper
stabilization system (b).
Figure 11.23: LIM system (a), assembly of the LIM (b).
117
Figure 11.24: Technical drawings of LIM and its mount.
Figure 11.25: First mold of the: (a) pod, (b) chassis.
118
Figure 11.26: Primer application to the pod’s mold model (a), applying paste to the pod’s
mold model (b).
Figure 11.27: Seconder application to the pod’s mold model
119
Figure 11.28: Determining the dividing points of the mold into parts.
Figure 11.29: Determining the dividing points of the mold into parts.
120
Figure 11.30: Applying polyester to the dividing points of the mold into parts.
Figure 11.31: Applying polyester to the dividing points of the mold into parts.
121
Figure 11.32: Obtained mold with screwing points.
Figure 11.33: Angle grinder application to the mold.
122
Figure 11.34: Obtained mold.
Figure 11.35: Separation of the mold from the determined points in a way that will not
damage the mold.
123
Figure 11.36: Completed mold for final polyester application.
Figure 11.37: Completed shell ready for paint application.
124
Figure 11.38: Primer paint application to the shell.
Figure 11.39: Primer paint application to the shell.
125
Figure 11.40: Completed paint application to the shell.
Figure 11.41: Completed paint application to the shell.
126
Figure 11.42: Polyester application to the chassis.
Figure 11.43: Mold of chassis ready for carbon fiber application.
12. Pod Safety Equipments and Commissioning Process
The pod will be carried outside the tunnel with a dolly to avoid any damage. In Figure
12.1, the dolly is shown with the pod inside of it.
Figure 12.1: Dolly to carry the pod outside the tunnel.
Since the mass of the pod is less than 80 kg, there will be no need for a lifter in the
competition area. The pod is adjusted to be lifted from four points determined in
127
accordance with its structure where the minimum risk is taken. The configuration of
these points is as in Figure 12.2.
Figure 12.2: Areas for lifting the pod.
Since the pod is mirrored by the x axis, it is very easy to lift the pod balanced.
If the pod’s battery power is cut, the braking system will automatically be activated.
Braking system is designed for this type of application on purpose. For the cases of
no need of power cut but a greater braking force is needed, the step motor will turn
until the wanted angle is satisfied. By adjusting the step motor’s angle, braking force
will differ for each case. For the normal scenario, braking force is 89.5 N, for
emergency it is 189 N and for power cut case it is 189 N. Braking system that is
designed intentionally normally closed is shown in Figure 12.3.
Figure 12.3: Closed form of break system.
128
The vehicle's general braking system will operate at maximum force in an emergency
that will not damage the rail.
There are 4 conditions of braking.
● Scenario
For normal procedure, the braking system will be activated autonomously by tracking
the position of the pod in the tunnel. Since the desired braking position is known, step
motors that control the brakes will turn at a needed angle and springs will apply more
pressure on the guide rail.
● Emergency
If there is an emergency case, the braking system will be activated by using the
remote control computer. Step motors will stop working and stop by giving the
maximum force that the brake can give.
● Power Cut
If there is a power cut, the braking system will be activated by using the remote
control computer. Step motors that control the brakes will turn at a needed angle and
springs will apply more pressure than it applies in the emergency case on the guide
rail.
● Connection Lost
If the connection is lost, the pod will secure itself and stop, waiting to be connected or
manually pulled.
Malfunctions and actions required are listed below.
LEVITATION PROBLEM:
In case the levitation motors encounter a malfunction, stabilization wheels will be

activated and in this way the chassis will not contact the rail and the rail will not be
damaged.
129
RASPBERRY PI PROBLEM:
In case the master computer encounters a malfunction, the emergency algorithm will
run and safely stop the pod, since the TCP protocol will not verify that there is a
connection between the master computer and remote control computer.
ARDUINO PROBLEM:
In case one or both of the arduinos encounter a malfunction, the emergency

algorithm will run and safely stop the pod. This will be achieved by checking the
sensor data continuously. If it is understood that data cannot be received from one or
more of the sensors, the emergency algorithm will be triggered.
LIM Driver PROBLEM:
One of the problems that the LIM Driver may encounter is a short circuit of the card.
Considering this risk, a 200 ns dead time is set between the high and low gate
signals. Also, in order for the driver not to cause any fuse current on the PCB, paths
are made with polygons to increase current capacity. If the LIM Driver encounters a
fault, the DSLIM will not produce more force since the power will be cut off. In such a
case, it will slow down earlier than expected due to the DSLIM not working. This will
prevent the pod from being damaged or crashed since it will be expected to break
early.
BREAK MOTOR PROBLEM:
In case the Break Motors encounter a malfunction, the linear induction motor will be
activated. By applying reverse current to DSLIM, reverse force will be applied.
User Interface
The general condition of the pod and all its subsystems can be followed from the
interface in general terms. Pages have been added to check the health of the pod
with mandatory parameters, as well as to set remote configurations.
130
Figure 12.4: Pre-flight check tab.
Figure 12.5: Telemetry tab.
131
Figure 12.6: Connection tab.
In case of power cut, The BMS which is explained in Section 4.3, will no longer
power the components required for the pod to work properly. However, when the
power is cut off, the brakes will automatically be closed. If the power flow from the
energy sources increases again, the BMS will be able to power the pod components.
No action is needed for instantaneous air pressure rise since the cruise will be at 1
atm.
Since the priority in the pod emergency stop command is to stop the pod and prevent
the problem from escalating, the 12S battery will be completely cut off to cut power to
the LIM and brake. In case the problem goes away, the 12S battery will be powered
and the pod will come back at a slow speed. If the problem still persists, the 2S and
6S batteries will also turn off the power and become completely undamaged and
inaccessible. In this case, the removal procedure will begin with the hook on the
back.
The necessary inputs for the calculations are: Mass, engine power and desired
maximum speed. Since the force was not regular throughout the cruise. Estimated
cruise time divided into 10000 parts and calculated the drag force, which is a variable
force in each section, and accordingly the total force, acceleration, velocity and
position were calculated. Based on these, the distance, time and acceleration
required for acceleration and deceleration were calculated. In addition, the required
kinetic energy and frequency were calculated. Then, depending on these datasets,
132
velocity-time, position-time, velocity-position, acceleration-time, drag force-time and
each reflector position Appendix A.1 and Appendix A.2.
Figure 12.7: Velocity vs Position graph in normal scenario.
Figure 12.8:Velocity vs Time graph in normal scenario.
133
Figure 12.9: Position vs Time graph in normal scenario.
Figure 12.10: Velocity vs Position graph at each reflector position and tolerance line in
normal scenario.
134
Figure 12.11: Drag Force vs Time graph in normal scenario.
Figure 12.12: Acceleration vs Time graph in normal scenario.
In case of emergency, there are opening windows on the brake systems to open
brakes (see Figure 12.13).
135
Figure 12.13: Access points to the brake systems and freewheels.
Figure 12.14: Tow hook backside of the pod for emergency case.
13. Communication and Video Transfer by Using IPCAM
Since NAM will be used for gyro applications, it is located exactly in the middle of the
pod. The side which has 300 mm length is considered as the movement direction.
Figure 13.1 shows NAM position in the pod.
136
Figure 13.1: NAM position on the pod.
Due to probable EMI, Cat 6A Shielded RJ45 cable will be used for the
communication between Raspberry Pi 3B+ and NAM. Also another cable with the
same specifications will be used for IP CAM and NAM communication.
Figure 13.2: IP CAM position on the pod.
Housing of the IP CAM is removed for less volume and mass.
6S battery will power NAM with a DB9 female connector. (Pin 5: ground; Pin 9:
power)
NAM will be grounded to chassis with a grounding cable which has 10 mm diameter
by traveling the shortest way.
137
Figure 13.3: Grounding cable.
Since IP Cam will be used, 3 network configurations will be established:
● Remote control computer network configuration
IP address: 192.168.1.0-20
Subnet mask: 255.255.255.0
Default gateway: 192.168.1.101
● Pod network configuration
IP address: 192.168.9.101
Subnet mask: 255.255.255.0
● IP Cam network configuration
IP address: 192.168.9.103
Subnet mask: 255.255.255.0
138
Figure 13.4: User interface of the remote control computer.
In the pod control software, position, velocity and acceleration in the x, y and z axis,
capsule orientation, four temperature and power consumption information will be
obtained from the main computer via the network access module. The package will
be encoded as a string and decoded in the control computer. This information will be
separated by "/". For example: "X_pos/Y_pos/Z_pos..."
In addition, the pod stop command will send the integer number 31 to the host
computer after pressing the emergency button on the control computer. It will
continue to work until the main computer gets the number 31. After receiving the
number, the emergency system will be activated.
14. Comments for Scaled Hyperloop Tunnel
In order to make the designed Hyperloop system realistic for possible future
implementations, the most important factor should be the human factor other than
engineering. The reason is there might be different technologies that are designed
with advanced engineering knowledge but cannot be used since they might have
possible dangerous accident possibilities. In this case, the designed system and pod
can reach very high speeds, and this might create problems for humans who are
using the Hyperloop system. Possibly, the first thing to consider to make the system
realistic might be the regulations regarding the people who can use the system
without problem, or who can use the system by taking prior measures. For this issue,
regulations can be designed with the medical institutions or other relative institutions.
These regulations should include certain measures like the maximum speed that is
reachable for humans, maximum braking force, maximum people capacity of one
pod, maximum magnetic field that can be generated, etc. After these criterions
139
determined, then the rest of the part should be left to the limits of today’s engineering
knowledge.
Firstly, it should be said that the cost of the Hyperloop system cannot be linearly
related to its size. The reason is since the size is increasing, not only the cost of the
materials that are used is increasing, but also the possibilities that can make the pod
not work are increasing. And solving all of these possibilities might require a lot of
engineering workforce and a lot of work hours. Also, adding a human factor into one
technological device makes the situation much more complicated. For example,
when the examples around the world are checked, even 2nd or 3rd grade engineering
students can do air vehicles that can fly in the air without a problem. But when it
comes to the public usage of this airplane, still only a limited number of companies
can produce airplanes because the students or small companies cannot meet
regulations due to lack of know-how or, mostly, the capital. Because of all of these
reasons, it can be forecastable that, at least in the first years of this Hyperloop
technology, a few big companies like SpaceX, Virgin Atlantic, and Lockheed-Martin
can produce this system. And the reason is not that other companies cannot do it,
but it is because they possibly cannot meet all of the complicated standards in order
to open their Hyperloop system to public use. This requires years of know-how and
certain capital. As a result, when the size of the Hyperloop system designed for this
competition is increased for public use, the cost will increase more than the linear
relationship. In that case, one might argue that, according to the economies of scale,
the cost should decrease as the passenger seat number increases. But it should not
be forgotten that Hyperloop technology is a newly developing technology, and
starting from lower sizes might help solve problems one-by-one and make the system
much more realistic. Otherwise, if it is tried to make the system much bigger than
today’s transportation vehicles, solving problems might be overwhelming, and
developing this technology might be unprofitable for the firms and this affects the
development of Hyperloop technology badly.
For the size of the designed Hyperloop system, it can be said that it can be bigger
than today’s subway sizes, but it should not be three or four times bigger than it. The
reason is as the system size is increasing cost is also increasing and also the daily
usage of the system becomes much less. Let’s think of it in this way, the Hyperloop
system was designed to make transportation to places away from like 100 kilometers
much faster and easier like airplanes. But since it is a land transportation vehicle, it
should use this advantage. Again, think of it in this way, while subways can make
departure non-stop, planes at least should wait an hour in the airport before any
other flight due to high passenger capacity, luggage loading, certain checks, etc. At
that point, one can argue that the designed Hyperloop system should not be like
planes, but it should be a fast, easy-to-use vehicle like subways. People should buy
tickets at the counters and can use Hyperloop any time without any check-in, or
luggage loading like airplanes. The system should be designed in a way that, when
people think that they are going to somewhere where there is a Hyperloop system
140
implemented, they should be, and could be, in the pod after 30 minutes. There
should not be any process like booking the tickets 1 week before the departure,
capacity limit issues, or missing the plane issues like in airplanes. Again, it should be
easy to use, easily accessible, and cheap. Actually, the main reason for this design is
to compete with airplanes. Because if it is not easier to use, and cheaper, why do
people just drop the airplanes and start to use Hyperloop? Plane tickets are already
bookable everywhere and considerably cheaper when it is compared to previous
years as can be seen in Figure 14.2. To conclude, if a new technology wants to
compete with existing technologies, it should be not 2 times but at least 5-10 times
cheaper, and more feasible than old technologies. Because people tend to use their
older habits unless there is a certain breakthrough. For this situation, Figure 14.1 can
be an example, while people tend to not choose air travel earlier, the usage of air
travel starts to increase exponentially as time passes. Given these reasons, if it is
desired to make the Hyperloop system like mentioned above, its size should not be
much bigger than subways and should be acceptable for public use. In other words,
the Hyperloop system should be an airplane in the shape of a subway.
Figure 14.1: Usage of the air travel in years. [5]
141
Figure 14.2: Cost of the average roundtrip between New York and London in years.
[5]
In the above, the similarities between the airplanes and subways with the Hyperloop
system in terms of functionality are mentioned. But the cost comparison of the
Hyperloop system can be made with a comparison to the MAGLEV trains. In that
context, work done in [6] suggests that the initial investment of 9.70 billion to 9.94
billion Euros is required for a MAGLEV Project between Ankara and Sivas. In this
paper, different scenarios are analyzed, and the cost of the system per kilometer
stays in the range of 24 million – 25 million Euros. Also, when the cost of the
Shanghai MAGLEV train is analyzed, 39.7 million dollars per kilometer is found.
These are two different estimations for the MAGLEV systems, at that point, it is
important to make an inference regarding how much of the cost can be considered
similar to the designed Hyperloop system. To make an inclusive and general
prediction, since a considerable part of MAGLEV is similar to the Hyperloop system,
one can argue that the cost can be in the range of -50% and +50% of these values. If
the lower limit is taken as 25 million dollars and the upper limit taken as 40 million
dollars per kilometer, a Hyperloop system can cost in the range of 12.5 million dollars
per kilometer and 60 million dollars per kilometer. Note that it is important to mention,
that the expected cost of the Hyperloop would be less than the MAGLEV system
such that the cost most probably will be around 12.5 million dollars per kilometer to
40 million dollars per kilometer. At that point, it is clear that these forecasts solely
depend on the examined works and educated guesses, however since full cost
analysis of the Hyperloop might take so much time, this cost analysis might be
considered rough but enough for the time being. In addition, from the article in [7], it
is mentioned that the average cost of the Hyperloop is expected as 54 million dollars
per mile which is 33.75 million dollars per kilometer (considering 1 mile = 1.60
142
kilometers). This example seems to support the rough estimation that is made above.
A much more complicated analysis might be done for following years’ competitions.
In the context of the Hyperloop, the tunnels carry great importance due to their
importance within the system. In this context, it is important to mention that the tunnel
costs might increase when the Hyperloop system is implemented in big cities like Los
Angeles, Istanbul, and New York City. Because most of these cities already have
their subway tunnel structures, implementing a completely new low-pressure tunnel
structure within the city might cause bigger problems than subway tunnels and
increase the costs. Another difference between the Hyperloop tunnels from the
subway tunnels might be the long distance. Since the Hyperloop system is designed
to provide long road transportation like 1000 kilometers, finding a straight, or an
almost straight, for efficiency, way to dig the tunnels might cause bigger problems.
Handling this tunnel problem might require a bigger workforce and advanced
knowledge of geological engineering. For the size of the tunnel, it can be said that it
will be solely dependent on the size of the designed Hyperloop system. But one can
argue that the diameter might be around 3 meters to 6 meters given that most of the
subway tunnel diameters are within this range. Also, the article in [8] confirms this
estimation by giving an example from Virgin Hyperloop’s tunnel size plan which has
3.3 meters in diameter.
For the maintenance issue, Hyperloop is already a very expensive construction and
their maintenance process will be the same. It would be the most challenging part of
the designed system. One system might meet the regulations regarding the specific
area, but it is much harder to maintain the situation of meeting these regulations. For
the public use of the Hyperloop system maintenance should be done very carefully.
So one suggestion to the companies that are developing this system might be to
increase the maintenance operations to their limits even though it is expensive
because of the lack of special material. But technological, material science
developments can be feasible using this system. Also fluid dynamic power will be
utilizable to help the Hyperloop moving and cooling system.
For the technical part of the maintenance, as suggested above, when the size is kept
within acceptable limits, it can be said that it will not be much harder or more
expensive than the maintenance of subways. Of course, there will be differences due
to much higher speed, levitation mechanism, etc. but they will most probably not be
much overwhelming to the companies that are already able to make rockets,
high-speed jets, and airplanes. The maintenance stations, of course, should be very
close to the working route of the Hyperloop, and it is important to locate them in a
way that Hyperloop does not need to change its direction for only maintenance. This
will decrease the maintenance time and the cost. Other than that, the majority of the
attention, possibly, might be given to the levitation due to its importance in the
proposed system. Also, there might be a maintenance crew in the pod while it is
working to just check the levitation situation of the pod and interfere immediately if
143
there is any problem. This crew might be also educated about the scenarios
regarding what happens if levitation fails and leading the Hyperloop crew in this
situation.
As a result, the Hyperloop system has a great promise for the future of
transportation. Depending on the different points of view, many more different
comments can be made regarding the future of this technology. But the forecasts and
suggestions that are made above tried to be made by looking at similar real-world
examples, and articles that mention similar technologies. To conclude, it is very easy
to say that this technology is one of the most promising and exciting engineering
areas that are discussed currently. And certainly, the world with a Hyperloop system
would be much easier to live in, which is the most important common thing in great
breakthroughs in engineering history.
In addition, some concept designs for real-life use of Hyperloop are as follows:
● Sectioning the tunnel
Tunnel vacuuming is one of Hyperloop's most costly jobs. In order to reduce

this cost, the parts that the pod passes through will be completely closed and
in case of a possible pressure increase, only the pressure of the open parts
will increase. In this case, there will be no need to reduce the pressure of the
closed parts. This will greatly reduce the cost.
● Connection between station and pod
If a process is applied without increasing the pressure of the tunnel in case of

loading and unloading of passengers and cargo, this reduces the cost and it is
possible to add more than one stop to the tunnel in long-distance journeys. It
can be connected to the station with the pressure protected bellows coming
out of the pod, then equalize the pressure here to the pod and the station, and
load and unload passengers and cargo from there, and the pod can continue
on its way. In this way, the pod can stop and continue on its way before the
pressure of the tunnel rises.
Figure 14.1: Pod coming to the station.
144
Figure 14.2: Gate on the tunnel.
Figure 14.3: Cross-section view of the pod in the tunnel.
145
Figure 14.4: Two separated bellows. One pops from the pod and one pops to the
tunnel from outside. Provides no air pressure loss during departure.
● Regenerative energy
When the pod stops powering the linear induction motor, the system will be
able to convert the magnetic field produced by the current still flowing on the
motor into energy.
● Categorized cargoes
Since Hyperloop is an efficient system for both people and cargo

transportation, how cargo is transported is also important. In this context, the
categorization of Hyperloop's cargo areas is important for the user experience.
Having differentiated cargo areas for each cargo type will ensure that cargoes
are delivered in safe and customized areas in accordance with their type.
Having separate areas for cargo that needs to be transported cold or hot and
for cargo that needs to be transported sensitively or urgently will increase both
the user experience and the operating efficiency of the system.
For a scaled Hyperloop system, a passive levitation system is more efficient since it
does not consume any electrical energy as stated in Section 6.
146
15. Budget Table
Component Unit Price (₺) Quantity Total Price (₺)

Carbon Fiber Applications 24.241,53 1 24.241,53
Polyester Pattern 10.000,00 1 10.000,00
Arduino Due 1.400,00 2 2.800,00
Raspberry Pi 3B+ 1.647,00 1 1.647,00
Pixhawk 2.4.8 5.400,00 1 5.400,00
T-Motor Air 40A 600Hz ESC 1.550,00 4 6.200,00
Antigravity MN5008 KV400 1.550,00 4 6.200,00
Profuse 8000 mAh 2S1P 40C 1.425,37 1 1.425,37
Profuse 6200 mAh 6S1P 45C 3.440,54 1 3.440,54
JetFire 22000mAh 12S 18.800,00 1 18.800,00
N52 Wedge Neodymium Magnet 425,00 48 20.400,00
Linear Induction Motor 18.500,00 2 37.000,00
Waveshare Laser Module 300,00 5 1.500,00
Steel Bolt 0,48 200 95,00
Steel Bolt Nut 0,11 500 55,00
MPU6050 54,00 1 54,00
TCRT5000 13,77 2 27,54
Brake Motor 1.010,00 4 4.040,00
Stabilization Wheels 180,00 12 2.160,00
Step Motor Driver 1.450,00 4 5.800,00
IP CAM 750,00 1 750,00
BMS 1.500,00 1 1.500,00
LIM Driver 1.500,00 1 1.500,00
Brake System 500,00 2 1.000,00
TOTAL 156.035,98
147
References
[1] Sui, Y., Niu, J., Yu, Q., Yuan, Y., Cao, X., & Yang, X. (2021). Numerical analysis of
the aerothermodynamic behavior of a Hyperloop in choked flow. Energy, 237,
121427. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2021.121427
[2] Seshadri, R., Persson, K., Kamat, P. V., & Wu, Y. (2015). Recent Advances in
Battery Science and Technology. Chemistry of Materials, 27(13), 4505–4506.
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemmater.5b02350
[3] Yisrael (2017). Retrieved 23 July 2022, from

https://www.labatteria.co.il/en/e-bike-battery-discharge-rate-4c-vs-3c/
[4] Chaidez, E. & Bhattacharyya, S.P. & Karpetis, A. (2019). Levitation Methods for Use
in the Hyperloop High-Speed Transportation System. Texas A&M University.
[5] Bowen, J., & Rodrigue, J. 5.5 – Air Transport. Retrieved 28 July 2022, from
https://transportgeography.org/contents/chapter5/air-transport/
[6] Arslan Tuncar, E., & Kiyak, İ. (2021). Economic Analysis Of Maglev Train
Technology A Case Study For Ankara Sivas Line. Kırklareli Üniversitesi Mühendislik
ve Fen Bilimleri Dergisi. https://doi.org/10.34186/klujes.944183
[7] Congress Should Give Hyperloops a Chance. (2021). Retrieved 28 July 2022,
from
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-06-09/congress-should-give-hyperl
oops-a-chance#:~:text=At%20a%20House%20hearing%20last,million%20per%20mil
e%20and%20c
[8] Hawkins, A. (2020). Virgin Hyperloop hits an important milestone: the first human
passenger test. Retrieved 28 July 2022, from
https://www.theverge.com/2020/11/8/21553014/virgin-hyperloop-first-human-test-spe
ed-pod-tube
148
Appendix
A.1 Plot_Real_Time.py
#This script is calculating the brake force, acceleration and

deceleration if in 178 meter velocity is not 0
#calculate again according the same method with different brake
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt

import numpy as np
m = 77.769 #Mass
e_force = 260 #Engine force
V = 26 #Maximum velocity
brake_force = 89.5 #Brake force
time = np.linspace(0,14,100000)
locations = [0,6,10,14,18,22,26,30,34,38,42,46,50,54,58,
62,66,70,74,78,78.1,78.2,78.3,78.4,78.5,78.6,78.7,78.8,
78.9,79,79.1,79.2,79.3,79.4,79.5,79.6,79.7,79.8,79.9,82,
86,90,94,98,102,106,110,114,118,122,126,130,130.1,130.2,
130.3,130.4,130.5,130.6,130.7,130.8,130.9,134,138,142,
146,150,154,158,162,166,170,174,178] #reflectors' location
def find_drag_force(V):
return 24.8 * V * V /1000 #Drag force equation
def calculate(time, V, e_force, m, brake_force):

V_list = [0]
X_list = [0]
a_list = []
drag_force_list = [0]
acceleration = True
V_current = 0
X_current = 0
for i in range(1,len(time)):
if V_current < V and acceleration == True: #acceleration part
drag_force = find_drag_force(V_current)
drag_force_list.append(drag_force)
total_force = e_force - drag_force #total force = motor
force - drag force
a = total_force/m #acceleration
149
a_list.append(a)
time_difference = time[i] - time[i-1]
V_current += time_difference*a # Vs = Vo + a*t
V_list.append(V_current)
X_current += (V_list[i]+V_list[i-1])*time_difference/2 #
delta X = (Vs + Vi)* delta t / 2
X_list.append(X_current)
else: #deceleration part

if acceleration == True:
acceleration = False
index = len(V_list)-1
if V_current >= 0:
if X_current < 178: #Check 178 meter
total_force = e_force + brake_force + drag_force
#total force = motor force + brake force + drag force
a = total_force/m # acceleration
a_list.append(-1*a)
V_current -= time_difference*a # Vs = Vo - a*t
X_current += (V_list[i]+V_list[i-1])*time_difference/2
# delta X = (Vs + Vi)* delta t / 2
time = time[0:len(X_list)]
if V_list[-1] > 0.01: #If last velocity is greater than 0

calculate again with brake_force+0.5 N
V_list = [0]
X_list = [0]
acceleration = True
calculate(time,V,e_force,m, brake_force+0.5)
elif V_list[-1] < -0.01: #If last velocity is smaller than 0

calculate again with brake_force-0.1 N
V_list = [0]
X_list = [0]
acceleration = True
calculate(time,V,e_force,m, brake_force-0.1)
else:
global locations
150
speeds = []
for i in locations:
for j in range(len(X_list)):
if float(i) == round(X_list[j],1):
speeds.append(V_list[j])
break
acce_time = time[1:index+1]
acce = a_list[0:index]
dece_time = time[index+1:]
dece = a_list[index:]
print()
print("Given mass (kg): ", m)
print("Given engine force (N): ", e_force)
print("Given Maximum velocity (m/s): ", V)
print()
print("Distance required for acceleration (m): ",X_list[index])
print("Time required for acceleration (s): ",time[index])
print("Acceleration (m/s^2): ", V/time[index])
print()
print("Distance required for deceleration (m): ",

178-X_list[index])
print("Time required for deceleration (s): ",time[-1]-time[index])
print("Deceleration (m/s^2): ",V/(time[-1]-time[index]))
print()
print("Kinetic energy (J): ",m*V*V/2)
print("Total time (s): ",time[-1])
print("Mechanical given brake force (N): ", brake_force)
print()
print("Maximum frequency (s^-1): ", V/0.05 )
print("Minimum delay (ms): ",50/V )
#Plots
plt.figure(1,facecolor='white') #Background color
plt.subplot(231)
plt.plot(time, V_list)
plt.xlabel("Time (s)")
plt.ylabel("Velocity (m/s)")
plt.title("Velocity vs Time")
plt.grid()
plt.subplot(232)
plt.plot(time, X_list)
plt.ylabel("Position (m)")
plt.title("Position vs Time")
plt.grid()
151
plt.subplot(233)
plt.plot(X_list, V_list)
plt.xlabel("Position (m)")
plt.title("Velocity vs Position")
plt.grid()
plt.subplot(234)
plt.plot(locations,speeds, "ro")
x = np.linspace(0,178,100)
y = x*0+V*0.95
plt.plot(x,y)
plt.title("Velocity vs Position in each reflector")
plt.grid()
plt.subplot(235)
plt.plot(time, drag_force_list)
plt.ylabel("Drag Force (N)")
plt.title("Drag Force vs Time")
plt.grid()
plt.subplot(236)
plt.plot(acce_time, acce)
plt.plot(dece_time, dece)
plt.ylabel("Acceleration (m/s^2)")
plt.title("Acceleration vs Time")
plt.grid()
plt.show()
calculate(time,V,e_force,m, brake_force)
A.2 Emergency_Plot.py
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt

import numpy as np
m = 77.769 #Mass
e_force = 260 #Engine force
V = 26 #Maximum velocity
brake_force = 189
152
def find_drag_force(V):
return 24.8 * V * V /1000
def calculate(time, V, e_force, m, brake_force):
print(brake_force)
V_list = [0]
X_list = [0]
a_list = []
drag_force_list = [0]
acceleration = True
V_current = 0
X_current = 0
for i in range(1,len(time)):
if V_current < V and acceleration == True:
total_force = e_force - drag_force
a = total_force/m
a_list.append(a)
V_current += time_difference*a
else:
if acceleration == True:
acceleration = False
index = len(V_list)-1
if V_current >= 0:
total_force = e_force + brake_force + drag_force
a = total_force/m
a_list.append(-1*a)
V_current -= time_difference*a
time = time[0:len(X_list)]
acce_time = time[1:index+1]
acce = a_list[0:index]
dece_time = time[index+1:]
dece = a_list[index:]
print()
153
print("Given mass (kg): ", m)
print("Given engine force (N): ", e_force)
print("Given Maximum velocity (m/s): ", V)
print()
print("Distance required for acceleration (m): ",X_list[index])
print("Time required for acceleration (s): ",time[index])
print("Acceleration (m/s^2): ", V/time[index])
print()
print("Distance required for deceleration (m): ",
X_list[-1]-X_list[index])
print("Time required for deceleration (s): ",time[-1]-time[index])
print("Deceleration (m/s^2): ",V/(time[-1]-time[index]))
print()
print("Kinetic energy (J): ",m*V*V/2)
print("Total time (s): ",time[-1])
print("Mechanical given brake force (N): ", brake_force)
print()
print("Maximum frequency (s^-1): ", V/0.05 )
print("Minimum delay (ms): ",50/V )
#Plots
plt.figure(1,facecolor='white') #Background color
plt.subplot(231)
plt.plot(time, V_list)
plt.title("Velocity vs Time")
plt.grid()
plt.subplot(232)
plt.plot(time, X_list)
plt.ylabel("Position (m)")
plt.title("Position vs Time")
plt.grid()
plt.subplot(233)
plt.plot(X_list, V_list)
plt.title("Velocity vs Position")
plt.grid()
plt.subplot(235)
plt.plot(time, drag_force_list)
plt.ylabel("Drag Force (N)")
plt.title("Drag Force vs Time")
154
plt.grid()
plt.subplot(236)
plt.plot()
plt.plot(acce_time, acce)
plt.plot(dece_time, dece)
plt.ylabel("Acceleration (m/s^2)")
plt.title("Acceleration vs Time")
plt.grid()
plt.show()
calculate(time,V,e_force,m, brake_force)
A.3 LIM_Mass.py
width = 0.35
tooth_width = 10
tooth_length = 60
slot = 12
yoke = 30
motor_length = 480
motor_width = 42
density = 0.00000760
yoke_area = yoke * motor_length

tooth_area = tooth_width * tooth_length * (slot + 1)
total_area = yoke_area + tooth_area
volume = total_area * motor_width
mass = volume * density
print(mass, "1 motor")

print(mass*2, "2 motors")
print(motor_length / width, "piece lamination")
155

Hyperloop United FINAL REPORT

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Hyperloop United FINAL REPORT

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

0

Information of Current Team Members 3

1. Pod Preliminary Information Table 4

2. Pod Design and Analysis 5

3. Pod Power Consumption 34

4. Energy Sources on the Pod 35

5. Pod Navigation System and Sensor Information 52

6. Pod Levitation System 71

7. Pod Propulsion System 81

8. Brake System of the Pod and Velocity Plots 96

9. Pod Stability System 106

10. Pod Heat Dispersion 110

11. Pod Production Steps 110

12. Pod Safety Equipments and Commissioning Process 127

13. Communication and Video Transfer by Using IPCAM 136

14. Comments for Scaled Hyperloop Tunnel 139

15. Budget Table 147

No Name - Surname University and Department Grade Role

1 Şükrü Furkan Kadir Has University 3 Captain

2 Çağlar Saatli Kadir Has University 3 Member

3 Serhat Buğra Boğaziçi University 4 Member

4 Barış Gökdemir Sabancı University PhD Member

5 Amir Boğaziçi University PhD Member

6 Yalın Evrim Kadir Has University 3 Member

7 Çağrı Işıkver Kadir Has University 3 Member

8 Ümit Şen Kadir Has University 3 Member

9 Deren Aydın Kadir Has University 2 Member

10 Selim Can Kadir Has University 1 Member

11 Onur Kağan Kadir Has University 3 Member

12 Halil İbrahim Kocaeli University 3 Member

13 Barış Karaali Middle East Technical University 1 Member

14 Umut Ulaş Aydın Sabancı University 2 Member

15 Mehmet Timur Kadir Has University Prof. Mentor

Feature Unit Explanation

Pod Mass kg 77.769

Chassis & Shell Chassis: Carbon Fiber - Epoxy

Hardness of Brake Pad Shore A 70

Linear Induction Motor

Number and Type of

RJ-45 Socket Shielded Cat 6a

2.1 Detailed Design Summary

The pod was designed, according to minimum lightweight, maximum security.

The shell of the pod is designed to be made of fiberglass-polyester composite. The

Figure 2.1: x, y and z axes of the pod.

Figure 2.4: Tow hook dimensions.

Figure 2.5: Mounting the tow hook on the shell.

Figure 2.6: Back view of the pod.

Figure 2.8: Location of ground cable of network access module on chassis.

Figure 2.12: Brake systems.

Figure 2.14: Pod electronics.

Figure 2.16: Chassis and shell modeling.

2.2 Pod Dimensions

Figure 2.18: Dimensions of the pod.

2.3 Aerodynamic Analysis

The aerodynamic analysis is conducted by using ANSYS. By evaluating the pod

During the designing of the pod, below parameters are considered:

Figure 2.20: The box model for aerodynamic analysis.

Figure 2.21: The mesh model for aerodynamic analysis.

The process of conducting an aerodynamic analysis is pressure-based and steady

Figure 2.23: First design (a) last design (b)

Figure 2.24: Pressure profile around the pod.

Figure 2.26: Velocity profile around the pod.

ρ is the density of air,

𝑣 is the velocity of pod,

Cells of the batteries are made of Lithium Cobalt Oxide (𝐿𝑖𝐶𝑜𝑂