TABLE OF CONTENTS

Sl. No. 1. TITLE INTRODUCTION 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Problem Objective 1.3 Motivation LITERATURE SURVEY 2.1 Introduction 2.2 Outline of the Chapters Circuit design of Thermal energy harvesting system 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Thermal unit 3.2.1 Radiator 3.2.2 Industrial benefits of aluminum radiators 3.2.3 Solenoid valve 3.2.4 PM DC Generator 3.3 DC-DC Converter 3.4 Microcontroller (89C2051) 3.5 Voltage Regulator 3.6 Crystal Oscillator 3.7 Bridge Rectifier 3.8 Relay 3.8.1 Relay Connection of a Digital Circuit 3.9 CO Sensor 3.9.1 Operating Principle of GAS Sensor 3.10 Microcontroller (89S52) 3.11 RF Transmitter 3.11.1 DTMF 3.12 RF Receiver Hardware: Design and Implementation 4.1 Introduction 4.1.1 Microcontroller 89S52 Board 4.1.2 Microcontroller 89C2051 Board 4.1.3 2x16 LCD Display 4.1.4 RF Transmitter Board 4.1.5 RF Receiver Board 4.1.6 DC-DC Converter Board 4.1.7 CO Sensor Board Page No. 01-07 02-06 06 06-07 08-11 09-10 11 12-39 13 14 14 15 16-18 19 19-22 22-26 26 26-28 28-29 29 30-32 32 32-33 34-37 37 37-39 39 40-49 41 42 42-43 44 45-46 46-47 47-48 48-49

2.

3.

4.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Sl. No. 5. TITLE Software: Design & Implementation 5.1 Introduction 5.2 Keil Integrated Development Software 5.3 Flowchart Model of 89C2051Program 5.4 Flowchart Model of AT89S52 Program 5.5 C Program for the Microcontrollers 5.5.1 C Program for 89C2051Microcontroller 5.5.2 C Program for AT89S52 Microcontroller Conclusion And Future Scope for Improvement 6.1 Conclusion 6.2 Future Scope for Improvement Bibliography Page No. 50-59 51 52 53 54 54 55-56 56-59 6064999 99 61-62 62-64

6.

INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER 1
1.1 INTRODUCTION
Maglev for transportation was invented in 1934 by Hermann Kemper. He was awarded DRP 643316. Maglev (derived from magnetic levitation), is a system of transportation that uses magnetic levitation to suspend, guide and propel vehicles from magnets rather than using mechanical methods, such as wheels, axles and bearings. Maglev transport is a means of flying a vehicle or object along a guideway by using magnets to create both lift and thrust, only a few inches above the guideway surface. High-speed maglev vehicles are lifted off their guideway and thus are claimed to move more smoothly and quietly and require less maintenance than wheeled mass transit systems regardless of speed. It is claimed that non-reliance on friction also means that acceleration and deceleration can far surpass that of existing forms of transport. The power needed for levitation is not a particularly large percentage of the overall energy consumption; most of the power used is needed to overcome air resistance (drag), as with any other high-speed form of transport. In the public imagination, "maglev" often evokes the concept of an elevated monorail track with a linear motor. This can be misleading. While several maglev systems are monorail designs, not all maglevs use monorails, and not all monorail trains use linear motors or magnetic levitation. Some railway transport systems incorporate linear motors but only use electromagnetism for propulsion, without actually levitating the vehicle. Such trains which might also be monorail trains are wheeled vehicles and not maglev trains. Maglev tracks, monorail or not, can also be constructed at grade (i.e. not elevated). Conversely, non-maglev tracks, monorail or not, can be elevated too. Some maglev trains do incorporate wheels and function like linear motor-propelled wheeled vehicles at slower speeds but "take off" and levitate at higher speeds. Differences in construction costs can affect chances for profitability. Maglev advocates claim that with conventional railway trains, at very high speeds, the wear and tear from friction along with the concentrated pounding from wheels on rails accelerate equipment deterioration and prevent mechanically-based train systems from achieving a maglev-based train system's high level of performance and low

levels of maintenance. Indeed, it was concerns about maintenance and safety that convinced Chinese authorities to announce a slowing down of all new conventional high-speed trains to 300 km/h (190 mph).
Maglev trains reduce pollution and increase both speed and efficiency when compared to other modes of transportation. It is a proven technology that is becoming more feasible technically and financially. Recent innovations in maglev technology, such as the Inductrack system, promise fail-proof operation. Since maglev trains do not produce any pollutants themselves, they can reduce pollution in transportation corridors and cities compared to their currently-operating alternatives [3]. Team Maglev seeks to produce a small-scale proof-ofconcept maglev system in order to demonstrate to consumers, investors, and regulators that maglev is a feasible and efficient option for new transportation infrastructure development.

1.2 OBJECTIVE
The need for more sustainable and efficient mass transportation of people, commercial freight, and military applications has led to a rethinking of rail-based transit. The objective is for Team Maglev to produce a model circuit track measuring twenty feet in length, capable of levitating and accelerating a scale-model maglev train. The track will be designed with ease of construction, stability of operation, and levitation efficiency as primary constraints. The final system will provide clear operating instructions, a maximum vehicle speed of eight miles per hour, passive lateral stability, passive magnetic levitation, and user controlled speed. A demonstration will provide an observer insight into how maglev technology works and why it is a viable alternative to traditional rail transport.

1.3 MOTIVATION
Transportation infrastructure around the country is less efficient, more costly to maintain, and relatively unsafe compared to maglev technology. Conventional locomotives and the highway system create traffic flow issues and contribute heavily to smog and pollution in metropolitan areas. Maglev infrastructure provides lower operating costs due to no moving parts and no friction during standard operation [1]. Given the advantages of maglev

technology, investors and developers should consider maglev as a way to increase efficiency and value for communities and commuters. Maglev trains can also reach higher speeds than conventional rail and provide a direct benefit to the shipping and coast-to-coast public transportation industries. Furthermore, firstadopter cities can claim as a part of their image the sleek, high-tech appeal of maglev technology.

1.4 SCOPE FOR THE PROJECT

According to us and guide dream, Team Maglev Train is to design and implement the Laboratory model of a levitated Maglev train. Team Maglev is to make popular the concept of Maglev train. In this project, different design model of Maglev train and its scope for future generation is also discussed.

LITERATURE SURVEY

Chapter 2

2.1 Introduction
This thesis project involved the design and analysis of a prototype laboratory model of Maglev systems which incorporate diverse technologies. Therefore, an extensive review of the literature was performed. The bibliography are organized in sections indexed in the Chapter 9 of this thesis. 2.1.1 Maglev Early Works Following is the summary of the early investigators of Maglev, including Powell and Danby, Davis and Wilkie, Coffey, Guderjahn and Wipf, Kolm and Thornton, Coffey, Atherton, Borcherts and others. A useful history of electromagnetic levitation research in the years 1910-80 is provided by Jayawant [162, 210, 215]. An exhaustive bibliography of magnetic suspension research and patents applied to bearings is provided by Geary [214]. This reference covers electrodynamic, electromagnetic, and superconducting magnetic suspension research through 1963. A thorough bibliography of electrodynamic and electromagnetic Maglev and linear motor research through 1975 is provided by Thornton [174, 175]. Magnetic levitation using eddy currents was first proposed in 1914 by the French scientist Bachelet who proposed using coils excited with AC currents by magnetic induction for levitation [217, pp. 15]. He built a prototype vehicle which carried a conducting aluminum plate on its bottom surface, and was levitated above a row of electromagnets. He found that for this system the power dissipation was prohibitive, requiring 15 kiloWatts to levitate a 15 kg mass at a height of 1 centimeter. The first recorded demonstration of magnetic levitation using superconductors was by Arkadiev in 1945 who levitated a 15 millimeter wide bar over a superconducting lead plate [215, pp. 35]. Subsequent research in the 1950s was done on levitated superconducting rotors for gyroscope applications. A method for levitating a moving vehicle over superconducting rails was proposed by Powell in 1963. This scheme was

modified later and by Powell and Danby in 1966 [168] who first proposed placing superconducting magnets on a moving vehicle, levitating the vehicle above a passive guideway where there are induced currents. Guderjahn et. al. [138, 158, 159] and Coffey et. al. [154] in 1969 proposed using similar technology to levitate and propel high speed rockets. The Guderjahn design consisted of null-flux coils levitated over a thick aluminum sheet. The calculated lift/drag ratio of 10/1 at cruising speed was sufficient for a test rocket sled, but is not practical for a high-speed train. Studies of baseline specifications for Maglev vehicles using low temperature superconductors were done by Borcherts et. al. [153] and Thornton [175] in 1973 who proposed specifications for vehicles capable of 300 miles/hour. Pioneering Japanese work was done by Ichikawa and Ogiwara [161] who in 1974 proposed a Maglev train with Nb-Ti suspension coils operating at 250 kA-turns. Continuous sheet guideways were considered plausible until the mid 1970s, when it was shown in several studies that significantly higher efficiency could be achieved with ladder or discrete-coil guideways. 2.1.2. Maglev System Specification and Design In the heyday of Maglev EDS research in the 1970s, a number of studies were done which specified Maglev system requirements and performance. Borcherts, Davis, Reitz, and Wilkie [153] in 1973 presented a baseline specification for an EDS train, with a cruising speed of 300 miles/hour. In this design, the train travels in a U-shaped guideway with separate lift and guidance magnets. Details of the cryostat design, as well as heat load were given. Miericke and Urankar [210, 211] in 1973-74 developed exact analytical expressions for an EDS system utilizing null flux coils and a continuous sheet track. Results are compared to normal flux systems. They conclude that the continuous sheet track is superior with regard to construction costs and safety as compared to the closed loop guideway proposed by Powell and Danby.

Andriollo et. al. [149] present a method for the design optimization of the coil configurations for an EDS Maglev system. A number of design criteria were considered in the design study, including the amount of the levitation coil conductor, the levitation transient stability, ride comfort, and others. Over 700 different designs were considered and evaluated by computer, and designs were optimized for a given cost function. Papers from workers at the Japanese National Railway [156, 157] discuss the design of the MLU002 prototypes, designed to operate up to 500 km/hour. The Japanese system has a non-linear vertical spring constant, and a nominal operating gap of approximately 20 cm. The papers give significant detail on the primary suspension, but secondary suspension and control is not discussed. The United States Department of Transportation funded 4 system concept definition reports [178] in 1992. The separate studies considered baseline designs for Maglev vehicles, including suspension, guidance, guideway, and propulsion systems. 2.1.3. Maglev Circuit Modeling Techniques The impedance-modeling technique is a method by which the electrodynamic effects in Maglev coils and guideway structures are reduced to lumped circuit models. The simplest circuit models allow calculation of average forces. Although the circuit modeling tends to obscure the details of the electrodynamic interactions, it is a powerful technique for evaluating Maglev systems. The technique was first introduced by Guderjahn et. al. [138] in 1969 in an analysis of the use of magnetic levitation for a rocket sleds in an evacuated tube. In this technique, the energy of the entire levitated system is evaluated by measuring the inductance of the excited coils as position is varied. The force on the coils can be calculated if the gradient of the mutual inductance is found. Image methods were used to predict Maglev lift forces at high train speed.

Iwasa [52] applied the technique to the Magneplane Maglev system in 1972. The technique was extended to study the static stability of pitch and roll. The method was used by Ohno et. al. [57] in 1973 to predict pulsating forces in discrete-coil Maglev guideway geometries. The method was applied in 1974 by Atherton and Eastham [134] to Maglev geometries for various levitation and guidance schemes. In 1975, Howell et. al. [91] applied similar techniques to the Wolfson experimental Maglev vehicle, and evaluated dynamic stability, ignoring aerodynamic damping. They found that dynamic stability could be greatly improved by adding passive copper damping windings. In 1976, Atherton et. al. [61] applied the impedance modeling technique to Maglev systems with passive secondary suspensions. They claim that passive aluminum damper coils mounted on the underside of the sprung mass are an attractive alternative to mechanical or hydraulic dampers. Wong, Mulhall, and Rhodes [59] summarized the results of previous workers and further explained the use of transformer models for evaluating Maglev forces. The technique was further expanded to include multiple-loop coils and guideways, with works by He, Rote and Coffey [48 - 50] and Ooi [58], among others. Methods of guideway inductance calculation were discussed by Mills [54 - 56], who summarizes some of the inductance calculation methods of Grover [34]. An important simplification that is made when evaluating the null-flux topology is that the guideway conductors are large enough and far enough apart that the mutual inductance with adjacent coils is ignored. Multiple-loop structures require the computation of inductance and resistance matrices. The computations are simplified if a single-harmonic excitation is assumed. Jain and Ooi [53] discuss the limitations of the impedance modeling technique. They show that the technique is valid in the high speed limit, but that the fundamental approximations break down in the low speed limit.

2.1.4 Guideway Design and Ride Comfort The study of guideway design and ride comfort are important because of safety and system cost issues. The cost of a guideway structure is expected to be 60-80% of the overall initial capital investment [145]. A more flexible guideway can be built at a lower cost, but there are complications due to vehicle/guideway interactions which may impact safety and ride quality. A Ph.D. thesis by Phelan [118] at M.I.T. discusses Maglev guideway structures. Fearnsides et. al. [146] reviewed ride quality specifications. They used railroads as their test case, but the results are applicable to Maglev vehicles. Later, Jayawant and Sinha [148] studied low speed vehicle dynamics with specific application to EMS Maglev systems operating up to 50-70 km/hour.

They built an experimental suspension test rig and determined that the optimum operating air gap for an attractive suspension is around 15 mm, if the passenger acceleration level was not to exceed 0.04g. This could be achieved without a secondary suspension. In 1972, Yamada et. al. [112] performed a study comparing guideways with independent coils with a proposed ladder guideway systems. It was found that the ladder system has a higher lift-drag ratio at cruising speed, and that it is desirable to increase the number of guideway coils in order to reduce the pulsating forces acting on the train. Cai. et. al. [145] and the group at Argonne National Laboratories have developed a model which consists of a rigid train consisting of multiple magnetic loads traveling over a flexible guideway. Their results show that less guideway deflections occur if the levitation magnets are distributed over the length of a vehicle. Although this is an intuitive result, their results are important as they quantitatively evaluate expected guideway deflections, which can be kept to a fraction of a centimeter by proper design.

In a U.S. Department of Transportation supported work, Zahn [120] discussed heating effects in steel rebars in Maglev guideways. In this study, transient electromagnetic effects due to the field from the passing train are analyzed for representative guideway structure.

PRINCIPLE OPERATION OF
MAGLEV TRAIN

CHAPTER 3 3.1 BASIC PRINCIPLE OF MAGLEV TRAIN

The basic concept of magnetism, likes poles repel and unlike poles attract, is the basic principle of Maglev Trains. The major difference between maglev train and conventional train is that maglev trains do not have any engine. Instead the train is propelled due to the magnetic field created by the electrified coils in the walls of the guideway and track. The electric currents supplied to the coils in guideway walls are constantly alternating to change the polarity of the magnetized coil. This change in polarity is used to pull the train forward and push from backside

Fig. 3.1 Step1: The North Pole at position 4 pulls the train front due to attraction of unlike poles and the North Pole at position 2 pushes the train front due to repulsion of like poles. South Pole also does the same. So the train moves forward.

Step2:

While moving forward if the pole does not change, then it will push the train backward and there will be no motion experienced. So, at step 2 the polarity of the coils in the guided walls changes. By doing so the train is again pushed forward making a complete motion. 3.2 TECHNOLOGY The term "maglev" refers not only to the vehicles, but to the railway system as well, specifically designed for magnetic levitation and propulsion. All operational implementations of maglev technology have had minimal overlap with wheeled train technology and have not been compatible with conventional rail tracks. Because they cannot share existing infrastructure, these maglev systems must be designed as complete transportation systems. The Applied Levitation SPM maglev system is interoperable with steel rail tracks and would permit maglev vehicles and conventional trains to operate at the same time on the same right of way. MAN in Germany also designed a maglev system that worked with conventional rails, but it was never fully developed. There are two particularly notable types of maglev technology: For electromagnetic suspension (EMS), electronically controlled

electromagnets in the train attract it to a magnetically conductive (usually steel) track. Electrodynamicssuspension (EDS) uses permanent magnets which create a magnetic field that induces currents in nearby metallic conductors when there is relative movement which pushes the train away from the rail. 3.2.1 ELECTROMAGNETIC SUSPENSION German engineers developed this design, called Transrapid. This method uses conventional electromagnets mounted at the end of a pair of structures under train. The magnetized coil running along the track repels the large magnets on trains undercarriage allowing the train to levitate to a height of 10mm with people onboard. This design needs constant monitoring and is adjusted by computers to prevent the train hitting the guideway track. The electromagnets mounted at the trains undercarriage helps to levitate the train even when its not moving. Germany demonstrated that the Transrapid maglev train can reach a speed of 300 mph (480 kph) with people onboard.

In current electromagnetic suspension (EMS) systems, the train levitates above a steel rail while electromagnets, attached to the train, are oriented toward the rail from below. The system is typically arranged on a series of C-shaped arms, with the upper portion of the arm attached to the vehicle, and the lower inside edge containing the magnets. The rail is situated between the upper and lower edges. Magnetic attraction varies inversely with the cube of distance, so minor changes in distance between the magnets and the rail produce greatly varying forces. These changes in force are dynamically unstable if there is a slight divergence from the optimum position, the tendency will be to exacerbate this, and complex systems of feedback control are required to maintain a train at a constant distance from the track, (approximately 15 millimeters (0.59 in)). The major advantage to suspended maglev systems is that they work at all speeds, unlike electrodynamic systems which only work at a minimum speed of about 30 km/h (19 mph). This eliminates the need for a separate low-speed suspension system, and can simplify the track layout as a result. On the downside, the dynamic instability of the system demands high tolerances of the track, which can offset, or eliminate this advantage. Laithwaite, highly skeptical of the concept, was concerned that in order to make a track with the required tolerances, the gap between the magnets and rail would have to be increased to the point where the magnets would be unreasonably large.In practice, this problem was addressed through increased performance of the feedback systems, which allow the system to run with close tolerances. 3.2.2 ELECTRODYNAMICS SUSPENSION Japanese engineers are developing a competing version of maglev trains that use an electrodynamic suspension (EDS) system, which is based on the repelling force of magnets. The key difference between Japanese and German maglev trains is that the Japanese trains use super-cooled, superconducting electromagnets. This kind of electromagnet can conduct electricity even after the power supply has been shut off. In the EMS system, which uses standard electromagnets, the coils only conduct electricity when a power supply is present. By chilling the coils at frigid temperatures, Japan's system saves energy.

Fig. 3.2 JR Maglev EDS suspension is due to the magnetic fields induced either side of side of the vehicle by he passage of the vehicles superconducting magnets. Another difference between the systems is that the Japanese trains levitate nearly 4 inches (10 cm) above the guideway. One potential drawback in using the EDS system is that maglev trains must roll on rubber tires until they reach a liftoff speed of about 62 mph (100 kph). Japanese engineers say the wheels are an advantage if a power failure caused a shutdown of the system. Germany's Transrapid train is equipped with an emergency battery power supply. Also, passengers with pacemakers would have to be shielded from the magnetic fields generated by the superconducting electromagnets. The Inductrack is a newer type of EDS that uses permanent roomtemperature magnets to produce the magnetic fields instead of powered electromagnets or cooled superconducting magnets. Inductrack uses a power source to accelerate the train only until begins to levitate. If the power fails, the train can slow down gradually and stop on its auxillary wheels. The track is actually an array of electrically-shorted circuits containing insulated wire. In one design, these circuits are aligned like rungs in a ladder. As the train moves, a magnetic field the repels the magnets, causing the train to levitate. There are two Inductrack designs: Inductrack I and Inductrack II. Inductrack I is designed for high speeds, while Inductrack II is suited for slow speeds. Inductrack trains could levitate higher with greater stability.

As long as it's moving a few miles per hour, an Inductrack train will levitate nearly an inch (2.54 cm) above the track. A greater gap above the track means that the train would not require complex sensing systems to maintain stability. Permanent magnets had not been used before because scientists thought that they would not create enough levitating force. The Inductrack design bypasses this problem by arranging the magnets in aHalbach array. The magnets are configured so that the intensity of the magnetic field concentrates above the array instead of below it. They are made from a newer material comprising a neodymium-iron-boron alloy, which generates a higher magnetic field. The Inductrack II design incorporates two Halbach arrays to generate a stronger magnetic field at lower speeds. Dr. Richard Post at the Livermore National Laboratory in California came up with this concept in response to safety and cost concerns. The prototype tests caught the attention of NASA, which awarded a contract to Dr. Post and his team to explore the possibility of using the Inductrack system to launch satellites into orbit. In electrodynamic suspension (EDS), both the rail and the train exert a magnetic field, and the train is levitated by the repulsive force between these magnetic fields. The magnetic field in the train is produced by either superconducting magnets (as in JRMaglev) or by an array of permanent magnets (as in Inductrack). The repulsive force in the track is created by an induced magnetic field in wires or other conducting strips in the track. A major advantage of the repulsive maglev systems is that they are naturally stableminor narrowing in distance between the track and the magnets creates strong forces to repel the magnets back to their original position, while a slight increase in distance greatly reduces the force and again returns the vehicle to the right separation.No feedback control is needed. Repulsive systems have a major downside as well. At slow speeds, the current induced in these coils and the resultant magnetic flux is not large enough to support the weight of the train. For this reason the train must have wheels or some other form of landing gear to support the train until it reaches a speed that can sustain levitation. Since a train may stop at any location, due to equipment problems for instance, the entire track must be able to support both low-speed and high-speed operation.

Another downside is that the repulsive system naturally creates a field in the track in front and to the rear of the lift magnets, which act against the magnets and create a form of drag. This is generally only a concern at low speeds; at higher speeds the effect does not have time to build to its full potential and other forms of drag dominate. The drag force can be used to the electrodynamic system's advantage, however, as it creates a varying force in the rails that can be used as a reactionary system to drive the train, without the need for a separate reaction plate, as in most linear motor systems. Laithwaite led development of such "traverse-flux" systems at his Imperial College laboratory. Alternatively, propulsion coils on the guideway are used to exert a force on the magnets in the train and make the train move forward. The propulsion coils that exert a force on the train are effectively a linear motor: an alternating current flowing through the coils generates a continuously varying magnetic field that moves forward along the track. The frequency of the alternating current is synchronized to match the speed of the train. The offset between the field exerted by magnets on the train and the applied field creates a force moving the train forward.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION THE MAGLEV TRAIN

CHAPTER - 4
4.1 PROPOSED DESIGN OF MAGLEV TRAIN A maglev train floats about 10mm above the guideway on a magnetic field. It is propelled by the guideway itself rather than an onboard conventional engine. The train is moving with the help of air. Since the dc motor is running the fan of the train. The train is moved freely in the guide way. The Figure below shows the complete setup laboratory module of Maglev train.

Fig. 4.1 Model of Maglev Train. The permanent magnets are positioned at the bottom side of the guide way and the bottom of the train model. These magnetically interact with permanent magnets on the guide way to provide levitation. The magnetic polarities of the vehicle and guideway magnets generate repulsive magnetic forces that suspend the vehicle and push it toward the centre of the guideway. The suspension automatically opposes any external force (wind, grades, curves, etc.) that tries to displace the vehicle from its equilibrium position. The Fig.4.2 shows the magnetic suspension based on the repulsive force between permanent magnets on a vehicle.

Fig. 4.2 Magnetic suspension based on the repulsive force between permanent magnets on a vehicle.

Fig. 4.3 permanent magnets are placed on the guide way. In general motor converts electrical energy into mechanical energy. Motor can be classified into AC and DC motor. In our project, we are using dc motor to run the train on the guide way. A brief description of the motor and its types are described below. A DC motor is designed to run on DC electric power. Two examples of pure DC designs are Michael Faraday's homopolar motor (which is uncommon), and the ball bearing motor, which is (so far) a novelty. By far the most common DC motor types are the brushed and brushless types, which use internal and external commutation respectively to reverse the current in the windings in synchronism with rotation. A permanent-magnet motor does not have a field winding on the stator frame, instead relying on permanent magnets to provide the magnetic field against which the rotor field interacts to produce torque. Compensating windings in series with the armature may be used on large motors to improve commutation under load. Because this field is fixed, it cannot be adjusted for speed control. Permanent-magnet fields

(stators) are convenient in miniature motors to eliminate the power consumption of the field winding. Most larger DC motors are of the "dynamo" type, which have stator windings.

Historically, permanent magnets could not be made to retain high flux if they were disassembled; field windings were more practical to obtain the needed amount of flux. However, large permanent magnets are costly, as well as dangerous and difficult to assemble; this favors wound fields for large machines. To minimize overall weight and size, miniature permanent-magnet motors may use high energy magnets made with neodymium or other strategic elements; most such are neodymium-iron-boron alloy. With their higher flux density, electric machines with high-energy permanent magnets are at least competitive with all optimally designed singly fed synchronous and induction electric machines. Miniature motors resemble the structure in the illustration, except that they have at least three rotor poles (to ensure starting, regardless of rotor position) and their outer housing is a steel tube that magnetically links the exteriors of the curved field magnets.

Fig. 4.4 Workings of a brushed electric motor with a two-pole rotor and permanent-magnet stator. ("N" and "S" designate polarities on the inside faces of the magnets; the outside faces have opposite polarities.) DC motors have AC in a wound rotor also called an armature, with a split ring commutator, and either a wound or permanent magnet stator. The commutator and brushes are a long-life rotary switch. The rotor consists of one or more coils of wire

wound around a laminated "soft" ferromagnetic core on a shaft; an electrical power source feeds the rotor windings through the commutator and its brushes, temporarily magnetizing the rotor core in a specific direction.

The commutator switches power to the coils as the rotor turns, keeping the magnetic poles of the rotor from ever fully aligning with the magnetic poles of the stator field, so that the rotor never stops (like a compass needle does), but rather keeps rotating as long as power is applied. The first practical electric motors, used for street railways, were DC with commutators. Power was fed to the commutators (made of copper) by copper brushes, but the voltage difference between adjacent commutator bars, excellent conductivity of the copper brushes, and arcing created considerable damage after only a quite short period of operation. An electrical engineer realized that replacing the copper brushes with electrically resistive solid carbon blocks would provide much longer life. Although the term is no longer descriptive, the carbon blocks continue to be called "brushes" even to this day. Sculptors who work with clay need support structures called armatures to keep larger works from sagging due to gravity. Magnetic laminations, in a rotor with windings, similarly support insulated-copper-wire coils. By analogy, wound rotors came to be called "armatures". Commutators, at least among some people who work with them daily, have become so familiar that some fail to realize that they are just a particular variety of rotary electrical switch. Considering how frequently connections make and break, they have very long lifetimes.

A: shunt B: series C: compound f = field coil

There are five types of brushed DC motor:

DC shunt-wound motor DC series-wound motor DC compound motor (two configurations):

o o

Cumulative compound Differentially compounded

Permanent magnet DC motor (not shown) Separately excited (not shown)

BRUSHLESS DC MOTOR Some of the problems of the brushed DC motor are eliminated in the brushless design. In this motor, the mechanical "rotating switch" or commutator/brushgear assembly is replaced by an external electronic switch synchronised to the rotor's position. Brushless motors are typically 8590% efficient or more, efficiency for a brushless electric motor, of up to 96.5% was reported[23] whereas DC motors with brushgear are typically 7580% efficient. Brushless DC motors are commonly used where precise speed control is necessary, as in computer disk drives or in video cassette recorders, the spindles within CD, CD-ROM (etc.) drives, and mechanisms within office products such as fans, laser printers and photocopiers. They have several advantages over conventional motors. Modern DC brushless motors range in power from a fraction of a watt to many kilowatts. Larger brushless motors up to about 100 kW rating are used in electric vehicles. They also find significant use in high-performance electric model aircraft. SWITCHED RELUCTANCE MOTORS The switched reluctance motor (SRM) has no brushes or permanent magnets, and the rotor has no electric currents. Instead, torque comes from a slight misalignment of poles on the rotor with poles on the stator. The rotor aligns itself with the magnetic field of the stator, while the stator field stator windings are sequentially energized to rotate the stator field.

The magnetic flux created by the field windings follows the path of least magnetic reluctance, meaning the flux will flow through poles of the rotor that are closest to the energized poles of the stator, thereby magnitizing those poles of the rotor and creating torque. As the rotor turns, different windings will be energized, keeping the rotor turning. Switched reluctance motors are now being used in some appliances.

Nothing in the principle of any of the motors described above requires that the iron (steel) portions of the rotor actually rotate. If the soft magnetic material of the rotor is made in the form of a cylinder, then (except for the effect of hysteresis) torque is exerted only on the windings of the electromagnets. Taking advantage of this fact is the coreless or ironless DC motor, a specialized form of a brush or brushless DC motor. Optimized for rapid acceleration, these motors have a rotor that is constructed without any iron core. The rotor can take the form of a winding-filled cylinder, or a self-supporting structure comprising only the magnet wire and the bonding material. The rotor can fit inside the stator magnets; a magnetically soft stationary cylinder inside the rotor provides a return path for the stator magnetic flux. A second arrangement has the rotor winding basket surrounding the stator magnets. In that design, the rotor fits inside a magnetically soft cylinder that can serve as the housing for the motor, and likewise provides a return path for the flux. Because the rotor is much lighter in weight (mass) than a conventional rotor formed from copper windings on steel laminations, the rotor can accelerate much more rapidly, often achieving a mechanical time constant under 1 ms. This is especially true if the windings use aluminum rather than the heavier copper.

But because there is no metal mass in the rotor to act as a heat sink, even small coreless motors must often be cooled by forced air. Overheating might be an issue for coreless DC motor designs. Among these types are the disc-rotor types, described in more detail in the next section. Vibrator motors for cellular phones are sometimes tiny cylindrical permanent-magnet field types, but there are also disc-shaped types which have a thin multipolar disc field magnet, and an intentionally unbalanced molded-plastic rotor structure with two bonded coreless coils. Metal brushes and a flat commutator switch power to the rotor coils. Related limited-travel actuators have no core and a bonded coil placed between the poles of high-flux thin permanent magnets. These are the fast head positioners for rigid-disk ("hard disk") drives. Although the contemporary design differs considerably from that of loudspeakers, it is still loosely (and incorrectly) referred to as a "voice coil" structure, because some earlier rigid-disk-drive heads moved in straight lines, and had a drive structure much like that of a loudspeaker. UNIVERSAL MOTORS

Modern low-cost universal motor, from a vacuum cleaner. Field windings are dark copper colored, toward the back, on both sides. The rotor's laminated core is gray metallic, with dark slots for winding the coils. The commutator (partly hidden) has become dark from use; it's toward the front. The large brown molded-plastic piece in the foreground supports the brush guides and brushes (both sides), as well as the front motor bearing.

A series-wound motor is referred to as a universal motor when it has been designed to operate on either AC or DC power. It can operate well on AC because the current in both the field and the armature (and hence the resultant magnetic fields) will alternate (reverse polarity) in synchronism, and hence the resulting mechanical force will occur in a constant direction of rotation.

Fig. 4.5 Train with dc motor, fan moving in air.

4.2 THE HARDWARE COMPONENTS FOR THE PROJECT I. II. III. IV. V. A 2ft x 0.5ft x 0.5ft train to resemble the maglev train. A track made of plexiglass used to guide the train that is levitated above it a unique of arrangement of permanent magnets Permanent magnets dc motor. Battery powered to the dc motor for propulsion.

The underlying goals of implementing a working small-scale model of a maglev train include: Levitation at a height of eight millimeters above the track Propulsion at speeds between four and eight miles per hour

The most significant challenge in implementing the concept on a small-scale includes understanding the magnetic forces that make the train achieve the goals at low speeds and over short distances. Magnets play an important role in achieving all goals, producing either attractive or repulsive magnetic fields to do so.

Small-scale permanent magnet maglev vehicles have been built and operated. However, for practical, long distance transport systems, permanent magnets are not practical. The cost of permanent magnet guideways is too great. Moreover, the clearance between the vehicle and the guideway is a fraction of an inch. The cost of constructing a guideway to the requisite tolerances, its vulnerability to foreign objects (trash, wind borne debris, etc.) and the problems of ice and snow buildup, make it impractical for high speeds travel.

COMPASION & APPLICATIONS

CHAPTER 5
5.1 Comparison with conventional trains

Major comparative differences exist between the two technologies. First of all, maglevs are not trains and are more similar to wingless aircraft than wheel-less trains. Maglev transport is non-contact, electric powered and controlled flight. It does not rely on the wheels, bearings and axles common to mechanical friction-reliant rail systems. Differences also lie in maintenance requirements and the reliability of electronic versus mechanically based systems, all-weather operations, backwardcompatibility, rolling resistance, weight, noise, design constraints, and control systems. I. Maintenance Requirements of Electronic Versus Mechanical Systems: Maglev trains currently in operation have demonstrated the need for nearly insignificant guideway maintenance. Their electronic vehicle maintenance is minimal and more closely aligned with aircraft maintenance schedules based on hours of operation, rather than on speed or distance traveled. Traditional rail is subject to the wear and tear of miles of friction on mechanical systems and increases exponentially with speed, unlike maglev systems. This basic difference reveals the huge cost advantage of maglev over rail and also directly affects system reliability, availability and sustainability.

II.

All-Weather Operations: While maglev advocates claim trains currently in operation are not stopped slowed, or have their schedules affected by snow, ice, severe cold, rain or high winds, they have not been operated in the wide range of conditions that traditional friction-based rail systems have operated. Also, maglev vehicles accelerate and decelerate faster than mechanical systems regardless of the slickness of the guideway or the slope of the grade because they are non-contact systems.

III.

Backwards Compatibility: Maglev trains currently in operation are not compatible with conventional track, and therefore require all new infrastructures for their entire route, but this is not a negative if high levels of reliability and low operational costs are the goal. By contrast conventional high speed trains such as the TGV are able to run at reduced speeds on existing rail infrastructure, thus reducing expenditure where new infrastructure would be particularly expensive (such as the final approaches to city terminals), or on extensions where traffic does not justify new infrastructure. However, this "shared track approach" ignores mechanical rail's high maintenance requirements, costs and disruptions to travel from periodic maintenance on these existing lines. It is claimed by maglev advocates that the use of a completely separate maglev infrastructure more than pays for itself with dramatically higher levels of all-weather operational reliability and almost insignificant maintenance costs, but these claims have yet to be proven in an operational setting as intense as many traditional rail operations,and ignore the difference in maglev and traditional rail initial construction costs. So, maglev advocates would argue against rail backward compatibility and its concomitant high maintenance needs and costs.

IV.

Efficiency: Due to the lack of physical contact between the track and the vehicle, maglev trains experience no rolling resistance, leaving only air resistance and electromagnetic drag, potentially improving power efficiency.

V.

Weight: The weight of the electromagnets in many EMS and EDS designs seems like a major design issue to the uninitiated. A strong magnetic field is required to levitate a maglev vehicle. For the Transrapid, this is between 1 and 2 kilowatts per ton. Another path for levitation is the use of superconductor magnets to reduce the energy consumption of the electromagnets, and the cost of maintaining the field. However, a 50-ton Transrapid maglev vehicle can lift an additional 20 tons, for a total of 70 tones, which consumes between 70 and 140 kW. Most energy use for the TRI is for propulsion and overcoming the friction of air resistance at speeds over 100 mph.

VI.

Noise: Because the major source of noise of a maglev train comes from displaced air, maglev trains produce less noise than a conventional train at equivalent speeds. However, thepsychoacoustic profile of the maglev may reduce this benefit: a study concluded that maglev noise should be rated like road traffic while conventional trains have a 510 dB "bonus" as they are found less annoying at the same loudness level.

VII.

Design Comparisons: Braking and overhead wire wear have caused problems for the Fastest 360 railed Shinkansen. Maglev would eliminate these issues. Magnet reliability at higher temperatures is a countervailing comparative disadvantage (see suspension types), but new alloys and manufacturing techniques have resulted in magnets that maintain their levitational force at higher temperatures.

VIII.

Control Systems: There are no signaling systems for high or low speed maglev systems. There is no need since all these systems are computer controlled. Besides, at the extremely high speeds of these systems, no human operator could react fast enough to slow down or stop in time. This is also why these systems require dedicated rights of way and are usually proposed to be elevated several meters above ground level. Two maglev system microwave towers are in contact with an EMS vehicle at all times for two-way communication between the vehicle and the central command centers main operations computer. There is no need for train whistles or horns, either.

5.2 COMPARISON WITH AIRCRAFT

For many systems, it is possible to define a lift-to-drag ratio. For maglev systems these ratios can exceed that of aircraft (for example Induct rack can approach 200:1 at high speed, far higher than any aircraft). This can make maglev more efficient per kilometre. However, at high cruising speeds, aerodynamic drag is much larger than lift-induced drag. Jet transport aircraft take advantage of low air density at high altitudes to significantly reduce drag during cruise, hence despite their lift-todrag ratio disadvantage, they can travel more efficiently at high speeds than maglev trains that operate at sea level (this has been proposed to be fixed by the vactrain concept).

While aircraft are theoretically more flexible, commercial air routes are not. High-speed maglevs are designed to be trip-time competitive with flights of 800 kilometers/500 miles or less. Additionally, while maglevs can service several cities in between such routes and be on time in all weather conditions, airlines cannot come close to such reliability or performance. Because maglev vehicles are powered by electricity and do not carry fuel, maglev fares are less susceptible to the volatile price swings created by oil markets. Travelling via maglev also offers a significant safety margin over air travel since maglevs are designed not to crash into other maglevs or leave their guideways. Aircraft fuel is a significant danger during takeoff and landing accidents. Also, electric trains emit little direct carbon dioxide emissions, especially when powered by nuclear or renewable sources, but more than aircraft if powered by fossil fuels.

5.3 FIELDS OF APPLICATIONS

I.

High-speed and low-speed transport with no electric loss to levitate and Non-contact acceleration of a body including launching spacecrafts into outer

complete conversion of kinetic energy into power during regenerative braking

II.

space;
III.

Docking/undocking spacecrafts in outer space performed with no energy

expenditures both in space and in many subsystems required for conventional technologies;
IV.

preservation of the returning spacecraft kinetic energy in the form of electric

power and storage of this power with no electric loss for reuse;
V.

take-off and landing of passenger liners on short runways (about 100m) with

acceleration by non-contact magnetic forces, with zero electric loss to accelerate and complete capture of liner's kinetic energy during landing on runway;
VI. VII.

maglev lifting/sinking with minimal energy consumption; port and construction maglev handling machinery with non-contact high-speed

operation and minimal masses of actuators;

VIII.

automobiles with a flywheel as the primary source of energy, for which the

volumetric stored kinetic energy density is comparable to that of petrol burning energy for ordinary cars;
IX. X.

extracting energy from fluids (wind and water of waves, tides and steams); zero electric loss magnetic levitation of superconducting magnet confining

plasma for nuclear fusion energy production

ADVANTAGES
DISADVANTAGES

CHAPTER 6 6.1 ADVANTAGES

I. The primary advantage is maintenance. II. Because the train floats along there is no contact with the ground and therefore no need for any moving parts. As a result there are no components that would wear out III. Because maglev trains float, there is no friction IV. A third advantage is less noise. V. Unlike trains or cars there is no surface contact or friction to slow them down. More speed=More passengers. VI. Faster trips: - High peak speed and high acceleration/braking enable average speed 3-4times the national highway speed limit of 65 mph (105 kmph). VII. High reliability: - Less susceptible to congestion and whether conditions than air and highway. VIII. Petroleum independence with respect to air and auto as a result of being electricallypowered. IX. Less polluting as a result of being electrically powered. Emissions can be controlled moreeffectively at the source of electric power generation than at many points of consumption, such as with air and automobile usage. X. Higher capacity than air. At least 12,000 passengers with potential for even higher capacities at 3-4 minutes headways XI. High safety both perceived and actual as based on the experiments. XII. Convinience and Comfort due to high frequency of service, vibration free, smooth-as-silk train rides and quieter. At speeds below 155 mph (249.4 kmph) the noise produced by Maglev trains is less than that by conventional trains. At speeds above 155 mph, most of the noise produced by vehicle is of aerodynamic origin, wheather it is on rail or levitated

6.2 DISADVANTAGE
I. The main disadvantages with maglev trains. Maglev guide paths are bound to be more costly than conventional steel railways. II. The other main disadvantage is lack with existing infrastructure. For example if a high speed line

FUTURE SCOPE MAGLEV TRAIN

CHAPTER 7

FUTURE SCOPE OF MAGLEV

7.1 THE M3 URBAN MAGLEV SYSTEM

M3 urban maglev vehicle, based on a design developed by Maglev Motion with support from the Federal Transit Administration. The FTA requirements were for a maximum speed of 161 km/s (100 mph), maximum acceleration and braking rates of 1.6 m/s, and minimum horizontal turn radius of 18.2 m (60). This system is described in more detail in Thornton (2009), and Wieler (2011). The M3 suspension and propulsion have been tested on a full size guideway at low speeds, and simulations have shown that the design can provide good ride quality at much higher speeds. The vehicle body is supported by pods of permanent magnets that provide the forces for levitation, guidance, and the field for a linear synchronous motor (LSM). The vehicle length can be varied by adding or subtracting mid-sections, with each mid-section having a length of 4 meters and capable of carrying 20 to 22 passengers. The short module length allows the vehicle to negotiate turns with a radius of 18.3 m

Figure 7.1 THE M3 URBAN MAGLEV vehicle capable of caring 60 passenger. NASA and private aerospace entities are looking at maglev technology for another kind of travel. A maglev line, tilted upward, could accelerate a rocket to give it an extra boost of speed to get the vehicle into low Earth orbit. A kind of maglev line could be used to accelerate payload entirely from the surface of the Moon, further cutting launch costs, thus granting easier access to the Moons natural resources.

7.2 MAGLIFTER

(LOW COST TO ORBIT)

The present cost of launching payloads into orbit is extremely high. Putting a pound of payload into Low Earth Orbit (LEO) costs approximately $10,000 more than if it were made of solid gold. The cost to orbit payloads varies with the kind of launch vehicle used, whether it is the Space Shuttle, Titan-IV, Atlas, Delta, Ariane-5, Proton, and so on. However, no existing launch system has the potential for a major reduction in launch cost from the $10,000 per pound value. A range of advanced launch vehicle concepts are being investigated with the hope that a major reduction in launch cost - that is, down to $1000 per pound or less can be achieved. One such approach is Maglifter. In Maglifter, the spacecraft is magnetically levitated and accelerated along a maglev track several miles in length. After reaching approximately 600 mph, the spacecraft detaches from its maglev carrier and accelerator, and ascends to orbit using rocket or air-breathing engines. The maglev carrier/accelerator would then brake to a stop and return to its starting point for the next launch. The maglev acceleration stage essentially replaces the 1st stage of a conventional rocket booster system, resulting in a much higher payload fraction. Using Maglifter, a spacecraft of a given take-off weight could carry approximately three times as much payload weight as a spacecraft of the same take-off weight that used conventional rockets for the first stage. Alternatively, for the same payload weight, the Maglifter spacecraft would weigh only a fraction of that of a spacecraft that used conventional rockets for its first stage.

Figure 10.2 Maglifter

7.3 MAGLIFTER: STARTRAM

The maglev development for Maglifter is modest. The levitation capability for Maglifter is a small step beyond that already achieved. Most of the development work would be for the Maglifter spacecraft. A more challenging, and higher performance payoff launch concept, is StarTram. The actual energy cost of putting a pound into Earth Orbit would be very low, only about 25 cents per pound if electric energy was directly used to accelerate payloads to an orbital velocity of 8 kilometers per second. Such velocities are practical for a Maglev system in an evacuated tunnel however, if the 8 km/sec spacecraft were to enter Earth's atmosphere at low altitude, the resultant air drag and heating would destroy it.

Figure7.3 maglifter If an evacuated maglev tube is used to guide the spacecraft to very high altitudes, i.e., 70,000 feet or more, the resultant heating and drag forces when it enters the low density atmosphere can be safely handledThe low pressure evacuated maglev tube can be magnetically suspended to reach very high altitudes, termed StarTram, would allow the launching of millions of tons per year into Earth orbit. Such a launch capability would open up the Solar System for human exploration, exploitation, and colonization.

7.4 Maglev car

It sure looks like a roller coaster, but this maglev (magnetic levitation) car is more likely in development for personal transportation. By Tyco and Gakken, the maglev system

Figure 7.4 maglev car Suspends the car 2-3 centimeters above the track, propelling the rider forward without friction. Since the fastest record for a full-blown maglev train is 361 mph, my guess is that an open cockpit like this one could make for one hell of a bug-faced ride. Maybe that face squeegee startup isn't such a crazy investment after all.

7.5 MAGLEV WIND TURBINE

The maglev wind turbine for commercial energy production was invented by ed mazur of maglev wind turbine technologies in 2004.wind power is a proven means of generating electricity. However, todays wind mill type generators are highly inefficient, expensive, high maintenance, hazardous to wildlife and take up too much land. The design of the wind mill has evolved into the 21st century. However, the science is as archaic as their 16th century Dutch counterparts. If it were not for government subsidies and tax credits of all types, it would take a half century to turn a real profit. The solution to the equation is the total transfer of kinetic energy produced by the windwithout friction. All horizontal axis wind mills use less than 1% of the available wind energy. Picture a maritime model as an example: sailing vessels would never leave the wharf if the rigging were replaced with a large wind mills secured to the deck. Initially, the wind must be captured not deflected to produce maximum power. Magnetic Levitation or Maglev is the most efficient means

of transferring kinetic energy from wind power to generate electricity. The wind turbine floats on a magnetic cushion with the aid of a linear synchronous motor (LSM). This technology eliminates all friction and delivers maximum wind energy directly to the power generators. Since the Maglev wind turbine blades capture all of the wind, it is possible to generate electricity for less than one cent per kilowatt hour.

Figure 7.5 maglev wind turbine

MAGLEV IN INDIA
A maglev line project was presented to the Indian railway minister (Mamta Banerjee) by an American company. A line was proposed to serve between the cities of Mumbai and Delhi, the Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said that if the line project is successful the Indian government would build lines between other cities and also between Mumbai Central and Chhatrapati Shivaji International Airport. On 7 December 2011, the government informed the Rajya Sabha that it was planning to introduce magnetic levitation wheel-less trains on the Delhi Metro. Minister of State for Urban Development Saugata Roy said: "The Delhi Metro proposes to introduce the wheel-less trains. The State of Maharashtra has also approved a feasibility study for a maglev train between Mumbai (the commercial capital of India as well as the State government capital) and Nagpur (the second State capital) about 1,000 km (620 mi) away. It plans to connect the regions of Mumbai and Pune with Nagpur via less developed hinterland (via Ahmednagar, Beed, Latur, Nanded and Yavatmal).

CONCLUSION

CHAPTER 8

CONCLUSION
Any practical and commercial use of maglev has to be examined for technical & financial feasibility. The technical feasibility has been established by status of Japanese MLU002 prototype system currently being run in yamanshi test line 5 & by German transrapid system at Emsland test facility 8. Both test systems have supplemented Maglev as the promise of a faster, smoother, clean and safer ride. The other aspect of financial feasibility is subjective to a country. To judge its financial feasibility its cost and revenue estimates have to be extensively studied in context of the geography, demography and existing transportation systems. Studies in America were carried out by National Maglev Initiative (NMI) evaluated Maglev potential and in short their conclusion was that a 300 mph ( 483 kmph ) is entirely feasible 1. Various commercial projects in America, Germany, China and Japan should leave no room of doubt for its economical viability. The need to upgrade this technology for a nation can be summed up in one sentencethat high mobility is linked with growth and productivity of nation. India has the most complex, widespread rail network which is now bogged down by congestion. Maglevprovides the flexibility to equip existing steel tracks with magnetic levitation (based on EDS) and propulsion system. This will help in operating both maglev and conventional trains on same track. The possible incorporation of both steel track and maglev guideway is hinted in figure. By this we can replace the conventional trains with maglev trains in phased manner. The space launch systems based on maglev are also feasible as indicated by NASA. Various test models have proved its technical feasibility and cost studies by NASA clearly indicate cheaper launching in future. Over the years India has developed strong infrastructure for space exploration and has its own array of launch vehicles. With NASA in pursuit of low cost maglev launch its time that India too must venture into this field so that it can compete, in the growing billion dollar market of satellite launch, in future

BIBLIOGRAPHY
[1]. K. Davey, Maglev: Transportation of the Future, [Online Website], [cited 2009 Feb 2], Available HTTP: http://www.magneticsmagazine.com/e-prints/maglev.pdf [2] H. Blodget, Mines Faster Than Yours, [Online Document], [cited 2009 Feb 1], G. Rennie, Magnetically levitated train takes flight, [Online Document], [cited 2009 1], Available HTTP: http://www.eurekalert.org/features/doe/2004-11/ddoe-

Available HTTP: http://www.slate.com/id/2115114/ [3] Feb

mlt111104.php

[4]

R.F. Post and D.D Ryutov, The Inductrack: A Simpler Approach to

Magnetic Levitation, IEEE Transactions on Applied Superconductivity, Mar. 2000, pp. 901 - 904. [5] 88. [6] 72. [7] O.F Storset and B.E Pagen, Discrete track electrodynamic maglev Part I: H. Cho, D.K Bae, H. Sung, and J. Lee, Experimental Study on the Modelling, IEEE Transactions on Magnetics, Sept. 2005, pp. 410-447. [8] Electrodynamic Suspension System With HTSC and PM Halbach Array Magnets, IEEE Transactions on Applied Superconductivity, Jun, 2008, pp. 808 811.
[9] A. Heller, A New Approach for Magnetically Levitation Trains and Rockets, [Online Website], [cited 2009 Jan 20], Available HTTP: https://www.llnl.gov/str/Post.html

R.F. Post, Maglev: A New Approach, Scientific American, Jan. 2000, pp. 82 S.R. Gourley, Track to the Future, Popular Mechanics, May 1998, pp. 68

[10]

R. F. Post, Toward More Efficient Transport: The Inductrack Maglev System,

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 2005.