This presentation was presented on behalf of the Georgia Institute of Technology Hyperloop Team during the Design Competition Weekend held at Texas A&M University on January 29th, 2016

1. 1
Georgia Tech Hyperloop
Team
Pod Final Design Briefing
1/29/2016
Presenters:
Sayan Roy
Khambrel Simpson
Walter Malchodi
Michael Foley
Rohan Deshmukh
SpaceX Hyperloop Design Competition

2. 2
Presentation Outline
• Team Management
• Pod Top Level Design Summary
• Pod Subsystem Design
• Pod Engineering Budgets
• Pod Performance Analysis
• Cost & Risk Analysis
• Logistics Plan

3. 3
Team Design Objective
The objective of the Georgia Tech Hyperloop team is to design and prototype an
innovative solution to the world’s growing hub-to-hub transportation requirements in a
cost-effective manner.
Compressor
Electric Motor
Payload
Space-Frame
Truss
Air-bearings
Magnetic Brake
Aerobody

4. 4
TEAM MANAGEMENT
“Individual commitment to a group effort--that is what
makes a team work, a company work, a society work,
a civilization work.”
– Vince Lombardi

5. 5
Team Structure & Objective
Project
Management
Sayan Roy
Aerodynamics
Walter
Malchodi
Structures
Khambrel
Simpson
Systems
Engineering
Rohan
Deshmukh
Levitation
System
Michael Foley
Electrical & Power
Systems
Jude Nifong
Stability &
Control Systems
Stephen Haley
Faculty Advisor
Dr. Neil Weston
Intent: design and receive funding to build a pod following design weekend

6. 6
POD TOP LEVEL DESIGN
“Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.”
– Leonardo Da Vinci

7. 7
Team Design Process
Define
Requirements
Preliminary
Design
Test &
Experiment
Analyze &
Validate
Iterate

8. 8
Design Requirements - Level 0
Objective Level 0 Requirement Traceability
DO-1
GT Hyperloop shall be
designed to provide a half-
scaled testbed for high-
speed transportation
Mission Objective
To design a novel
solution to the world’s
growing transportation
needs in a cost-
effective manner.DO-2
GT Hyperloop shall provide
insight into alternate and
cost efficient modes of
transportation

9. 9
Flight System Overview: Subsystem Breakdown
Hyperloop Pod
Stability &
Control System
Directional
control
Longitudinal
Control
High-Speed
Magnetic
Braking System
Low-Speed
Braking System
Navigation
System
Telemetry
Measurement
Data Filtering
Electrical Power
System
Controller
Batteries
Levitation
System
Air Bearings
Compressor
Motor
Structures
Space-Frame
Aerodynamic
Paneling
Payload

10. 10
Flight System Overview: Selected Subsystem Designs
Hyperloop Pod
Stability &
Control System
Directional
control
Longitudinal
Control
High-Speed
Magnetic
Braking System
Low-Speed
Braking System
Navigation
System
Telemetry
Measurement
Data Filtering
Electrical Power
System
Controller
Batteries
Levitation
System
Air Bearings
Compressor
Motor
Structures
Space-Frame
Aerodynamic
Paneling
Payload

11. 11
Pod Dimensions/Design Summary
• Pod Length: 255 inches (21.25 feet)
• Max Pod Width: 42.2 inches (3.52 ft)
• Max Pod Height: 46.2 inches (3.85 ft)
Front View
Side View
Top ViewAerobody
Compressor
Air Bearings
21.25 ft
3.52 ft
3.85 ft

12. 12
POD SUBSYSTEM DESIGN
“Alone we can do so little, together we can do so
much.”
– Hellen Keller

13. 13
• Air Bearing system based on hovercraft design
– Want to lift the pod with minimal air bearing size, and minimal airflow requirements
– Also want to avoid supersonic flow, which complicates design analysis
– Made use of Excel solver to optimize our system
Source: A. Bliault and L. Yun, Theory and Design of Air Cushion Craft
• Air directed around center
plate, aimed back toward
center
– Helps induce turbulence,
reduces flow speed
without losing lifting
pressure
• t - 1.00”
• h - 0.05”
• Pc – 2.7 psi
Pod Subsystem Design: Levitation System
Air
Cushion
t
h
𝑃𝑐ℎ = 𝜌 𝑎 𝑣𝑗
2
𝑡(1 + cos 𝜃)

14. 14
Pod Subsystem Design: Levitation System - Air Bearings
• Attaches to the truss with 4 bolts on extrusion out of top surface
• Air fed through center with size 3 NPT
• Aluminum 6061-T6 construction
• PTFE-Acetyl blend (e.g. Delrin) rimmed base to reduce friction on loss of compression
• Bearing area: 10” x 15”
17.15” 12.15”

15. 15
Pod Subsystem Design: Air-Compression System
• Compressor
– Utilizing a pressure optimized fan from Hover Hawk
– 32” Diameter, 10 lbf, capable of moving 27,000 cfm at 3000 RPM with 37 hp
– Flow diameter reduced to 3” for piping to air bearings
• Electric Motor
– Using a COTS 43.7 hp DC motor available from Thunderstruck Motors
– Dedicated battery pack for only this motor.

16. 16
Pod Subsystem Design: Air-Compression System
• Motor sits behind/under the compressor
• Compressor is contained in aluminum ducting inlet in case of failure
• Inlet provides structural support to truss

17. 17
Pod Subsystem Design: Stability System
• Directional Control
– Implemented with a damping system featuring wheels around the central I-beam
• Longitudinal Control
– Each air bearing has an electrically controlled valve to modulate output airflow
– Each air bearing measures the distance it is from the ground
– Air bearing output is adjusted based on distance measurement
• Note that this active control is a complement to the passive control inherent in the air
bearing design
• Air bearing too near to ground implies that a decrease in output has a relatively small
corresponding decrease in distance
• Air bearing too far from ground implies that an increase in output has a relatively
small corresponding increase in distance

18. 18
Pod Subsystem Design: High Speed Braking System
• High-speed Magnetic Braking System
– To brake, permanent magnetic linear eddy current brakes are moved into position about
the central I-beam
• Goal is to maintain deceleration of 0.5g
• For pod mass, estimated required braking force is 2670N
– Will use a custom-made braking system
• Modular design of H2W Technologies magnetic brakes makes for flexible, cost-effective
customization
• High accuracy not needed since braking force can be modulated by altering the magnets'
distance from the central I-beam
Magnet assembly diagram,
property of H2W Technologies

19. 19
Pod Subsystem Design: Low Speed Braking System
• Low-speed Braking System
– This brake is engaged when the pod is traveling at a speed of about 20 mph, below these
speeds the magnetic brake does not provide enough braking force
– To brake, the brake pads will be pressed against the surface of the horizontal guiding
wheels, thus using a friction force to slow the wheels and bring the pod to a safe and
complete stop
Wheel with Low-speed
Brake Assemblies shown
interfacing with I-beam

20. 20
SYSTEMS ENGINEERING BUDGETS
“The budget is not just a collection of numbers, but an
expression of our values and aspirations”
– Jacob Lew

21. 21
System Engineering Budget: Mass
Pod Components
Confidence
Level
Unit
Count
Mass Per Unit (kg) Contingency (%) CBE Mass (kg)
Passenger Seats 7 2 15 15% 34.5
Skids 5 4 6 25% 30
Hyperloop Truss 7 1 96.2 15 % 111
Suspensions Skid 5 4 3 25% 15
Aerodynamic Paneling 6 1 66.2 20% 79.4
Fire Extinguishers 7 2 1.47 15% 3.39
Valves 4 4 2.5 30% 13
Permanent Magnets 6 2 4 20% 9.6
Magnet Suspensions 5 2 2 25% 5
Directional Wheels 7 4 2.5 15% 11.5
Wheel Brake 6 4 2.5 20% 12
Wheel Suspension 6 2 2 20% 4.8
Magnetic Brake Control
(Servos)
7 2 2 15% 4.6
Wheel Control 6 2 0.2 20% 0.48
Communication Unit 7 1 1.36 15% 1.56
Micro-controller 7 1 0.05 15% 0.058
Active Power Management 7 1 0.2 15% 0.23
Amplified Photodiode Array 7 2 0.5 15% 1.15
Temperature Sensors 7 2 0.2 15% 0.46
System Release Valves 7 6 1 15% 6.9
Passengers 7 2 44 15% 101
Skid Piping 4 1 10 30% 13
Compressor Power System 7 1 78 15% 89.7
Fan 7 1 6.8 15% 7.82
Aluminum Inlet 6 1 16.6 20% 19.9
Fan Tunnel and T 6 1 7.2 20% 8.64
Motor 7 1 105 15% 120
MEV Mass
(kg)
705
CBE= Current Best
Estimate
Mass Limit (kg) 713
MEV= Maximum Expected
Value
Mass Margin (kg) 8.2
Confidence Level Contigency
9 5.0%
8 10%
7 15%
6 20%
5 25%
4 30%
3 35%
2 40%
1 45%
705 kg = 1554 lb

22. 22
System Engineering Budget: Power
Subsystem:
Confidence
Level
Unit
Count Power (W)
Contingency
(%)
CBE Power
(W):
Compressor
Motor
7 1 33000 15 37950
Servos 5 9 10 25 113
Microcontroller 7 1 5 15 5.75
Feedback
Controllers
7 9 5 15 51.8
Network Access
Panel
7 1 20 15 23
MEV Power
(W)
38140

23. 23
POD PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS
“[Design is] not just what it looks like and feels like.
Design is how it works”
– Steve Jobs

24. 24
Pod Performance Analysis: Aerodynamics
• Aerodynamics within the tube are somewhat different that those in the standard
earth atmosphere due to the low density of the gas, the most important factor
being the potential for reduced drag.
• Aerodynamic performance is based mainly on:
– pod geometry
– pod speed
– fluid properties
– active flow control (levitation system)

25. 25
Pod Performance Analysis: Aerodynamic Analysis Goals
• Aerodynamic shell analysis aids in decision making to achieve goals:
– Minimize aerodynamic drag on the pod
• reduce flow separation
• reduce wetted and cross sectional area
• reduce turbulence and vorticity
– Minimize shell weight based on
• appropriate structure
• appropriate material
– Minimize cost based on:
• appropriate material
• appropriate construction process

26. 26
Pod Performance Analysis: Aerobody Geometry and Simulation
Parameters
• Aerobody geometry meets the following criteria:
– Fits around the spaceframe with the goal of reducing aerodynamic drag by
increasing the radii of curvature seen by the flow
– Removes from the flow many of the surfaces likely to cause turbulence
– Incorporates an inlet at the front of the pod to intake air for use in levitation
– Utilizes minimal length, reducing skin friction and total mass
• Simulations were run in ANSYS 16.1 Fluent for a half tube (with a symmetry
plane) at the following conditions. A Transition-SST model was used to solve
– Static pressure in the tube: 9.0 psia
– Pod velocity (inlet velocity): 202 mph, 109 mph, and 45 mph cases
– Air bearing pressure: 2.7 psig
– Compressor intake pressure: 0.0 psig
– Temperature: 80.3 degrees °F

27. 27
Pod Performance Analysis: Compressor Inlet Pressure Contours
•Compressor inlet static
pressure contours (on the
vertical symmetry plane):
– Greater pressure on
underside of pod due to
skids
– Pressure drag from
nacelle

28. 28
Pod Performance Analysis: Flow Simulation Results
• Force coefficients and flow visualization, at 202 mph
– CD= 1.06
– CL,air bearing= 8.67
– CL,pod= 0.091
• Flow out the front and sides of the air bearings interrupts flow caused by the
forward motion of the pod
– Causes large, turbulent vortices around sides of the pod, as well as a small amount
of reversed flow on the upper surface of the tail fairing
– Contributes to very high drag coefficient, much of which can be attributed to the air
bearing flow effects
• At 109 & 45 mph the drag coefficient increases to CD=1.23 & CD=2.6 respectively
– Caused by relative increase in the effects of the air bearings

29. 29
Pod Performance Analysis: Vibrational
• Pod truss is subjected to modal vibrations simulated through ANSYS Software
– Fixed supports at the air-bearing mountings, then vibrations are simulated
– Frequencies for testing was a broad range with the most significant deformations from
11 to 31 Hz
– Pod truss appears to deform to a maximum at the front (7.6 in), which in reality is
mitigated to a reasonable level by the installation of the fan
– Based on the FEA, the pod should be able to withstand vibrations during any
operational case
Mode Frequency
(Hz)
Maximum
Deformation (in)
1 11.0 1.93
2 13.9 3.07
3 21.0 2.35
4 28.2 3.53
5 29.8 3.58
6 30.5 3.96
7 31.7 7.61
Mode 1 simulation resulting in a 1.9317 inches deformation
Mode 7 simulation resulting in a 7.6116 inches deformation

30. 30
Pod Performance Analysis: Structural Design Case Initial Acceleration
• The fixed support was located at the pod
pusher interface, and at the air bearings of
the vehicle
• Components which contributed more than
2% of total vehicle weight were modeled
as force vectors and applied to truss
members
• Magnitudes of force vector were applied
for the case of a 1.7 G ramped
acceleration
Component
Percent Total
Mass
Passenger Seats 4.98%
Air Bearings 3.99%
Hyperloop Truss 16.0%
Aerodynamic
Paneling
11.0%
Passengers 14.6%
Compressor
Power System
13.0%
Steel Inlet 2.76%
Motor 17.4%

31. 31
• Equivalent von Mises Stress is
far below the Tensile Yield
Strength of Aluminum Alloy
6061 - T6 of 40,000 psi.*
• Deflections are concentrated at
passenger seating locations
• Gauge of Aluminum Tubing
could be decreased due to
large Margins of Safety
Pod Performance Analysis: Structural Design Case Initial Acceleration
Structural Design Case Initial
Acceleration
Maximum absolute
deformation in
the X-Axis
3.2*10-3 in
Equivalent (Von Mises)
Stress
4120 psi
*Source: Aerospace Specification Metals Inc. Al 6061 - T6

32. 32
Pod Performance Analysis: Structural Design Case Nominal
Deceleration
Structural Design Case Nominal
Deceleration
Maximum absolute
deformation in
the X-Axis
2.7*10-3 in
Safety Factor 15 Max, 9.27 Min
● Additional Fixed support added at location of
Permanent Magnet, and force magnitudes were set
for 1.6 Gs. This is above maximum deceleration
created by brake engagement
● Similar deformations to initial acceleration analysis
● Safety Factor was calculated to be at minimum 9
therefore gauge of aluminum tubing could be
decreased

33. 33
Pod Performance Analysis: Structural Design Case End of Tube
Off-Nominal Crash
• Fixed support placed on ends of 3 of 4 fan
inlet members to represent off nominal
condition
• Force Magnitudes were applied to the
truss representing a 1.7 G Deceleration
• Von Mises stresses were far below
Tensile Yield Strength of the Aluminum
• Majority of deformations occurred at the
rear of the pod near battery attachments
suggesting that this load should be evenly
distributed to members in the rear of the
truss system
Structural Design Case End of Tube Off-
Nominal Crash
Maximum absolute
deformation in
the X-Axis
0.0102 in
Equivalent (Von Mises)
Stress
1000. psi

34. 34
Pod Trajectory Profile (Speed vs. Distance)
For the Trajectory Profile, we divided the flight into four regions. Each section had a
unique force equation associated with it that was used to find the velocity and
distance:
1. Initial Acceleration: 𝐹1 = 𝑚 𝑝𝑜𝑑 𝑎 𝑎𝑐𝑐𝑒𝑙,𝑖𝑑𝑒𝑎𝑙 −
1
2
𝜌𝑆𝑉2 𝐶 𝐷
2. Coasting: 𝐹2 = −
1
2
𝜌𝑆𝑉2 𝐶 𝐷
3. Magnetic Braking: 𝐹3 = −
1
2
𝜌𝑆𝑉2 𝐶 𝐷 − 𝐶 𝐵 𝑉
4. Mechanical Braking: 𝐹4 = −𝑚 𝑝𝑜𝑑 𝑎 𝑑𝑒𝑐𝑒𝑙,𝑖𝑑𝑒𝑎𝑙

35. 35
Pod Trajectory Profile (Speed vs. Distance)
Pod Trajectory
Speed
(m/s)
Distance (m)
Magnetic Brake
Mechanical
Brake
Coasting
Initial
Acceleration

36. 36
COST AND RISK ASSESSMENT
“Never was anything great achieved without danger ”
– Niccolo Machiavelli

37. 37
Engineering Unit Life Cycle Total Cost
System Cost ($FY16)
Engineering Unit $ 27,210
Manufacturing
Costs
$ 11,680
Testing Costs $ 8,280
Labor Costs $ 5,390
Total $ 52,570
The total life cycle cost falls well within the suggested cost
cap of $100 K

38. 38
Cost Breakdown by Subsystem for Engineering Unit
System Cost ($FY16)
Levitation System $ 3,890
Structure $ 9,350
Electrical Power
System
$ 10,020
Navigation $ 786
Stability and
Controls
$ 1,320
Payload $ 1,840
Total $ 27,210

39. 39
Risk Identification
1. If the pod’s batteries were to
overload, then the subsystems may
shut down or fire may occur.
2. If the pod’s guide wheels were to
fail, then the pod will no longer have
lateral control, longitudinal control
will be reduced, and guide rail may
be damaged.
3. If the pod compressor were to fail,
then the pod will loose levitation.
4. If the pod structure were to fail,
stored energy will be released
endangering the pod’s inhabitants
and the Hyperloop itself.
Consequence
Battery Overload
Guide Wheel Failure
Compressor Failure
Structure Failure
Likelihood
1 2 3 4 5
5
4
3
2
1
Likelihood
1 – Remotely possible (less than
1%)
2 – Unlikely, but possible (1%-
15%)
3 – Moderately likely (15%-50%)
4 – Likely (50%-85%)
5 – Almost certain (greater than
85%)
Consequence
1 – Minor performance
degradation
2 – Some performance
degradation or erosion of margin
3 – Significant margin erosion,
system requirements barely met
4 – System requirements not
met; design requirements
threatened
5 – Extreme performance
degradation, design requirements
not met

40. 40
Risk Mitigation
1. Battery Overload: control/avoid
– Implementation of voltage & current regulators into control topology
– Implementation of safety protocol for the handing of batteries during assembly and
manufacturing phase
2. Guide Wheel Failure: control/avoid
– Redundant brake system
– Emergency wheel lock technology
– Failure scenario testing during systems integration phase
3. Compressor Failure: control/avoid
– Implementation of regulators & valves into control topology
– Testing using a full ground unit to identify issues post-integration
4. Structure Failure: avoid
– Additional factors of safety
– Thorough subsystem testing & analysis of truss components and aerobody

41. 41
Production Schedule
Presentation Finalization
Presentation Presentation Practice
Design Weekend
Design Iteration and Procurement Plan Finalization
New member
recruitment and
orientation
Procurement
Stability and Control System
Levitation System
Structural Components
Compressor/Fan System
Testing Rigs and Parts
Margin
Learning Tools Workshop
Safety
Manufacturing Techniques
Software
Electronics
Margin

42. 42
Production Schedule(Cont.)
Procurement Margin
Subsystem Assembly
Stability and Control System
Levitation System
Structural Components
Compressor/Fan
Margin
Subsystem Testing Rig Assembly
Levitation System
Margin
Structural
Subsystem Testing
Margin
Levitation System
Compressor/Fan
Stability and Control System
Structural Components

43. 43
Production Schedule(Cont.)
Subsystem Testing Margin
System Integration
System Testing
Transportation to Competition Weekend
Margin
Competition Weekend

44. 44
LOGISTICS PLAN
“The amateurs discuss tactics: the professionals
discuss logistics”
– Napoleon Bonaparte

45. 45
Design Comments on Scalability
• System Size
– Scaled model of the pod based on two half-scale passengers
– Size of pod does not scale linearly with added payload weight
– Changing the tube length will impact the batteries required to power the levitation
system
– Changing the tube diameter will affect the sizing of the pod as well as maximum
speed
– Changing the pod size will affect the weight and thus the design of subsystems,
particularly the levitation system
• Cost
– If our monetary resources are scaled, it will impact manufacturing costs the most
• Mitigation: reduce the pod size, which will lessen the this cost
– The primary maintenance cost driver will be the replacement of air bearings if
unwanted friction occurs
– Use of many COTS components reduce maintenance costs and down time

46. 46
External Transport System
•Design based on a conventional hydraulic scissor lift system
•Two scissor lift systems connected by an aluminum frame which sits on castor
wheels will be sufficient to lift the pod weight for local transport
•Tie down straps will secure the pod in place during truck travel for longer distances
•SpaceX provided crane will move the pod to and from the competition platforms
Source: http://bigboysgaragetoys.com/car-lifts/dannmar-cadet-6000xl-mid-rise-scissor-lift/

47. 47
Stored Energy and Hazardous Materials
• Batteries
• Compressed air within the compressor, distribution system, and skids
• Magnetic potential energy when any ferrous materials are in their vicinity
• Lead in soldered components (lead-free solder will be used when possible)
• Dust generated from occasional rubbing of the skids
Subsystem Capacity Material
Computer Systems 15Ah Lithium Ion
Actuators 16Ah Lithium Polymer
Compressor 100Ah LiFePO4

48. 48
Vacuum Compatibility Assessment
• The pod will run at a tube pressure of 9 psi
• Compressor is rated to operate at a tube pressure above 7 psi
• No restriction on batteries at low pressure
– Issues may arise due to low rate of heat transfer if the batteries overheat
– Mitigated through cooling system running over heat sink attached to battery
• Only the pressurized air distribution system, which provides air to the skids as well
as for component cooling, is designed to maintain any pressure other than tube
pressure
• All components are compatible with the chosen pressure

49. 49
Concluding Remarks
•The Georgia Tech Hyperloop team plans to raise funds over design weekend and
build a pod to compete in the Competition Weekend planned for Summer 2016
•The levitation system design is based on working hovercraft models
•The pod features a lightweight and rigid space frame structure
•The pod features both magnetic and mechanical braking systems
•The pod is designed to feature many commercial off-the-shelf parts which will
minimize costs as well as production time
•The pod design will be subject to further modeling and analysis
•This pod design features an affordable cost for the production of a scale model

50. 50
Questions?
Source: http://www.rita.dot.gov/sites/default/files/hyperloop.jpg

51. 51
Backup Slides

52. 52
Design Requirements - Level 1
Objective Level 1 Requirement Parent Requirement System
POD-1 Pod shall be designed to operate in a pressurized tube DO-1, DO-2
Pod
POD-2 Pod shall be designed to reach its final destination safely and efficiently DO-1, DO-2
POD-3 Pod shall be designed for ease in loading, launch, and unloading DO-1, DO-2
POD-4
Pod shall be able to receive data and commands throughout duration of
operation
DO-1, DO-2
POD-5
Pod shall fit within the cross-section provided within the SpaceX
Hyperloop Track Specification
DO-1, DO-2
LOOP-1 Test track shall be 1 mile long steel tube with a 6 foot outer diameter DO-1, DO-2
Hyperloop
LOOP-2
Test track shall be comprised of an aluminum track and rail mounted to a
concrete fill bed
DO-1, DO-2
LOOP-3 Test track shall implement a 12 foot long foam pit for emergency braking DO-1, DO-2
LOOP-4
Test track shall be designed to allow three types of levitation/suspension
systems including wheels, air bearings, and magnetic levitation
DO-1, DO-2
LOOP-5 Test track’s tube shall have an internal pressure between 0.02 – 14.7 psi DO-1, DO-2
LOOP-6 Test track shall not implement a thermal control system DO-1, DO-2
LOOP-7
Test track shall not be fitted with a structurally integrated propulsion
system
DO-1, DO-2
LOOP-8 Test track shall not implement an auxiliary electric rail DO-1, DO-2
LOOP-9 Test track shall be fitted with an Ethernet communication network DO-1, DO-2
LOOP-10 Test track shall be fitted with navigation aids via optical markings DO-1, DO-2
LOOP-11
Test track environment shall be regulated using a self-contained
environments measurement system
DO-1, DO-2

53. 53
Design Requirements - Level 2
Objectives Parent Requirement
Level 2 Requirement
Subsystem
Affected
TJ-1 POD-2, LOOP-1 Pod shall operate under the flight phases of acceleration, coast, and deceleration
TrajectoryTJ-2 POD-2, LOOP-1 Pod shall reach within 50 feet of the end of tube
TJ-3
POD-5, LOOP-1,
LOOP-2
Pod shall travel efficiently between the ingress and egress areas and within the hyperloop
ST-1 POD-1, LOOP-5
Pod shall be capable of surviving operation in a low-pressure environment throughout its
lifetime
Structure
ST-2 POD-2 Pod shall have sufficient structural integrity and factor of safety rating
ST-3 POD-1, LOOP-11 Pod shall incorporate a self-contained flight data recorder weighing less than 1 lbf
ST-4 POD-3, POD-5 Total mass of each pod shall not exceed 1,610 lbm
ST-5 POD-3,
Pod shall be designed to be compatible with a crane for lifting
ST-6 POD-2 Pod shall be designed to carry a maximum payload weight of 200 lbs
ST-7 POD-1, POD-2 Pod shall be able to withstand acceleration of loads of at least 1.7g
TH-1 POD-1, LOOP-6
Pod shall maintain a temperature that is within the operational range for the pod bus and
payload of 60°F to 80°F
Thermal
TH-2 POD-1, LOOP-6 Pod shall implement a closed-loop thermal control system
L-1 POD-3 Pod shall be moveable at low speeds when not in operation
Levitation
L-2
LOOP-2, LOOP-4,
LOOP-7
Pod shall implement air bearings for levitation
P-2
LOOP-2, LOOP-4,
LOOP-5, LOOP-7
Pod shall implement an air-compression system
P-3
LOOP-2, LOOP-4,
LOOP-7
Pod shall implement horizontal wheels for pod control
SCS-1
POD-2, LOOP-3,
LOOP-4
Pod shall have a braking system capable of reducing speed to zero in a controlled fashion
SCSSCS-2 POD-2, POD-4, LOOP-9 Pod shall implement a continuous telemetry stream with a speed greater than 1 Hz
SCS-2 POD-2, POD-4, LOOP-9 Pod shall be able to safely stop autonomously through an external command
SCS-3 POD-2, LOOP-10 Pod shall implement a closed-loop navigation control system
EPS-1 POD-2, LOOP-8 Pod power system shall be sized to remain operational for the duration of operation
EPSEPS-2 LOOP-8 Pod shall supply no less than 35 kW of power to pod subsystems
EPS-3 LOOP-8
Pod subsystems shall have different power supplies, broken down based off voltage
EPS-4 LOOP-8 Pod shall implement a closed-loop power control system
CDH-1 POD-2, POD-4, LOOP-9 Pod shall have embedded systems for real-time control over telemetry data acquisition C&DH
COM-1 POD-2, POD-4, LOOP-9 Pod shall implement a continuous telemetry stream with a speed greater than 1 Hz Comms

54. 54
Pod Subsystem Design: Navigation System
• Telemetry is achieved by interfacing sensors with a microcontroller
– Concurrent data gathering
• Color sensors used to detect internal tube markings
– Data read directly from pins
– Separate RGB channels
– Fast rise time so that even
at high speeds markers
are detected
• Inertial measurement unit (IMU) used to measure pod motion
– Integral position measurement
• IMU data integrated to provide position
• Note: results in integration drift over time
– Interval error correction
• Color sensor positions treated as absolute references
• Pod position error corrected at every internal tube marking
– Data is streamed in real-time at a minimum frequency of 1 Hz using the User
Datagram Protocol via the SpaceX-provided Network Access Panel
• Navigation based on sensor data
– Air bearings and braking controlled from microcontroller
– Pod begins braking when the position measurement determines the deceleration
region has been entered
• First stage braking is linear permanent magnet eddy current brakes
• When a safe speed to deploy the clamping brakes has been reached, the
microcontroller issues the full stop command
Source: Texas Advanced Optoelectronic Solutions

55. 55
Pod Subsystem Design: Command & Data Handling System
Command & Data Handling Control Schematic
-Notes on locations of Sensors:
• Thermistors on each microcontroller and each battery
• Photo sensors are external to Pod
• Pressure sensors are located in each air bearing, each pipe leading to air bearing
and compressor
• Distance Sensor are located under each air bearing
C&DH Board
Comms
ADCS Board
Control InputControl Output
Compressor
Thermal
EPS
Battery 1
Battery 2
Battery 3
Battery 4
Braking
Navigation
IMU
Photo
Sensor
Thermistors
Wifi Receiver/Transmitter
Distance
Pressure
MAG
Mechanical
Valve Actuators

56. 56
Pressure Sensor
Sensor Map and Location
56
Side View
Top View
Pressure Sensor
(Above each Skid)
Pressure Sensor
(Each Skid)
Not Listed:
-Thermocouples
-Measuring temperature of each
microcontroller and each battery
-Color Sensor
Pressure Sensor
(External)
Distance Sensors
(Each Skid)
SpaceX Network Access
Panel

57. 57
Pod Subsystem Design: Structural Space Frame
• Aluminum 6061-T6 chosen
for its weldability, low
density, and availability in a
variety of tubing sizes
• Truss is designed to isolate
high energy systems from
human passengers
• Interior plates are not load
bearing, instead dampen the
passenger compartment
from oscillating at low
frequencies
• Truss is stiffened where
motor, fan casing, fan duct,
and batteries are located
Aluminum 6061 - T6
Density 2700 kg/m^3
Ultimate Tensile
Strength 310 MPa
Modulus of Elasticity 68.9 GPa
Poisson's Ratio 0.33
Pod Pusher Interface

58. 58
Pod Subsystem Design: Payload
• Pod Payload is half scaled, capable of
carrying two persons
• Each person is half sized and weighs
111.5 lbs
• Pod incorporates seats for each half scale
person

59. 59
Aerobody
•Reduced tube pressure reduces air density and pressures on the pod
•Pod must still be aerodynamic to maintain the benefits of being in the tube
•Unstressed aerodynamic shell designed to ensure that the pod can move smoothly
through the air with as little pressure and friction drag as possible.
•Three main panels will each be constructed separately for ease of construction and
modularity
–front cowling
–main tube
–tail cone
•Construction will use vacuum bagged quasi-isotropic laminate carbon fiber epoxy
composite
•Negative mold on a positive form

60. 60
Pod Performance Analysis: Thermal
• Electrical components
– Digital components will have negative thermal contributions
– Small actuators will also have negative thermal contributions
– Battery internal resistance is attributed entirely to heat loss
• Assume internal resistance to be at worst 0.1A
• At the operating speed, the current draw of 241.8A leads
to a heat loss of 24.18W

61. 61
Pod Subsystem Design: Power System
• Provide each subsystem with its own battery to reduce inefficiencies from
conversion
• Real time, remote monitoring of power levels provided via network interface
• Power broken down into three categories, each with their own batteries
– Low voltage for microcontrollers, feedback controllers, and sensors
• Low voltage supply with low power draw can guarantee long battery life for computer
systems used to operate and control the rest of the pod’s systems
– Medium voltage for small actuators
• 12V operating point provides a universal supply for motors, servos, and other small
to medium actuators
– High voltage for compressor
• Due to the motor’s high current draw a large battery pack must be used so that many
cells operate in parallel. This prevents the individual cells from dropping too far below
their rated voltages even at high current
• 100Ah battery pack delivers 17.41kW to the compressor fan motor

62. 62
Preliminary Bill of Materials
Pod Components
Custom Built or Commercial Off
the Shelf
Passenger Seats Commercial Off the Shelf
Skids Custom Built
Hyperloop Truss Custom Built
Suspensions Skid Custom Built
Aerodynamic Paneling Custom Built
Fire Extinguishers Commercial Off the Shelf
Valves Commercial Off the Shelf
Permanent Magnets Commercial Off the Shelf
Magnet Suspensions Custom Built
Directional Wheels Custom Built
Wheel Brake Commercial off the Shelf
Brake Suspension Custom Built
Magnetic Brake Control (Servos) Commercial off the Shelf
Emergency Brake Control Custom Built
Communication Unit Commercial off the Shelf
Micro-controller Commercial off the Shelf
Active Power Management Custom Built
Amplified Photodiode Array Commercial off the Shelf
Temperature Sensors Commercial off the Shelf
System Release Valves Custom Built
Passengers Custom Built
Skid Piping Custom Built
Compressor Power System Commercial off the Shelf
Fan Commercial off the Shelf
Aluminum Inlet Custom Built
Fan Tunnel and T Custom Built
Motor Commercial off the Shelf

63. 63
Cost Breakdown
Pod Subsystem
Pod Components​
Unit Count​ Unit Cost $ (FY 2016)​ Total Cost $ (FY 2016)​ Confidence Level​ Contingency​ CBE Cost $ (FY 2016)​
Levitation
System
Fan​
1​ $ 485.00 $ 485.00 7​ 15.00%​ $ 557.75
Aluminum Inlet​
1​ $ 600.00 $ 600.00 6​ 20.00%​ $ 720.00
Fan Tunnel and T​
1​ $ 500.00 $ 500.00 6​ 20.00%​ $ 600.00
Skid Piping​
1​ $ 300.00 $ 300.00 4​ 30.00%​ $ 390.00
System Release
Valves​
6​ $ 30.00 $ 180.00 7​ 15.00%​ $ 207.00
Valves​
4​ $ 80.00 $ 320.00 4​ 30.00%​ $ 416.00
Skids​
4​ $ 200.00 $ 800.00 5​ 25.00%​ $ 1,000.00
Structure
Hyperloop Truss​
1​ $ 4,391.50 $ 4,391.50 7​ 15.00%​ $ 5,050.23
Suspensions Skid​
4​ $ 200.00 $ 800.00 5​ 25.00%​ $ 1,000.00
Aerodynamic
Paneling​
1​ $ 2,190.00 $ 2,190.00 6​ 20.00%​ $ 2,628.00
Magnet
Suspensions​
2​ $ 80.00 $ 160.00 5​ 25.00%​ $ 200.00
Wheel Suspension​
2​ $ 200.00 $ 400.00 6​ 20.00%​ $ 480.00
Electrical
Power System
Motor​
1​ $ 2,780.00 $ 2,780.00 7​ 15.00%​ $ 3,197.00
Permanent
Magnets​
6​ $ 150.00 $ 900.00 6​ 20.00%​ $ 1,080.00
Compressor Power
System​
1​ $ 4,876.00 $ 4,876.00 7​ 15.00%​ $ 5,607.40
Magnetic Brake
Control (Servos)​
2​ $ 60.00 $ 120.00 7​ 15.00%​ $ 138.00

64. 64
Cost Breakdown
Navigation
Wheel Control​
2​ $ 150.00 $ 300.00 6​ 20.00%​ $ 360.00
Communication
Unit (Space X)​
1​ $ - $ - 7​ 15.00%​ $ -
Micro-controller​
1​ $ 50.00 $ 50.00 7​ 15.00%​ $ 57.50
Amplified
Photodiode Array​
2​ $ 5.00 $ 10.00 7​ 15.00%​ $ 11.50
Temperature
Sensors​
2​ $ 50.00 $ 100.00 7​ 15.00%​ $ 115.00
Stability &
Controls
Wheel Brake​
4​ $ 40.00 $ 160.00 6​ 20.00%​ $ 192.00
Wheel Suspension​
2​ $ 200.00 $ 400.00 6​ 20.00%​ $ 480.00
Directional Wheels​
4​ $ 140.00 $ 560.00 7​ 15.00%​ $ 644.00
Payloads
Passengers​
2​ $ 500.00 $ 1,000.00 7​ 15.00%​ $ 1,150.00
Passenger Seats​
2​ $ 250.00 $ 500.00 7​ 15.00%​ $ 575.00
Fire Extinguishers​
2​ $ 50.00 $ 100.00 7​ 15.00%​ $ 115.00
MEV Total​
$ 23,210.50 $ 27,213.58

65. 65
Pod Performance Analysis: Aerodynamic Flow Visualization
Oil path lines show the significant flow changes on the aerobody above both of the air
bearings, as well as the reverse flow and flow separation on the tail of the fairing

66. 66
Loading and Unloading Logistics Plan
Pod Loading Sequence
• Before loading, the Team Captain will give a 15-minute Safety and Logistics
briefing to the Judging Panel and Hyperloop Test Director (a SpaceX or Tesla
employee).The Hyperloop Test Director will also lead a safety and technical
inspection of the physical Pod. The loading cannot proceed until the Hyperloop
Test Director approves.
• Pod will be transported via road to the Hyperloop Staging Area. Pods will be lifted,
via a SpaceX-provided crane if necessary, onto the Staging Area, an open-air flat
surface 20 feet in length.
• On the Staging Area platform, the Pod will perform Functional Test A, which will
include a demonstration of power-up.
• When Functional Test A is complete, Gate 1 will open and the Pod will be moved
into the Hyperloop using the Pod’s External Transport System.

67. 67
Loading and Unloading Logistics Plan(Cont.)
Pod Loading Sequence (Cont.)
• In the Hyperloop, the Pod will be physically connected to the Mechanical
Propulsion Interface.
• Gate 1 will then be closed and Functional Test B will be performed.
• The Hyperloop will be depressurized to operating pressure.
• At operating pressure, Functional Test C will be performed while operating on the
Pod’s internal power.

68. 68
Loading and Unloading Logistics Plan(Cont.)
Pre - Launch Functional Tests
• Test A: The Pod shall be powered on and the two-way communication link shall
be established.
• Test B: The Pod’s communication link shall be reestablished. It shall be verified
that the pod is sending out a full readout of data from the sensors. In addition, it
shall be verified that the Pod is responding to commands
• Test C: The Pod’s levitation system shall be activated and hover at a height of .05
inches.

69. 69
Loading and Unloading Logistics Plan(Cont.)
Pod Unloading Sequence:
• Once the is pod within 50 feet of Gate 2, the Hyperloop shall be pressurized.
• The Pod shall send a report when the Hyperloop is safe to enter and when the
Pod is safe to approach.
• Gate 2 shall be opened once the Test Director deems the operation safe.
• The Pod shall be moved to the Exit Area on the External Transport System and
powered down to the Ready-To-Remove state.
• The Pod shall be removed with the crane.

70. 70
Description of Safety Features
Mitigation of Complete Loss of Power:
• Each major subsystem shall have a dedicated battery
– Air Intake System
– Levitation System
– Braking System
– Microcontrollers and Sensors
• In the case of a power loss from one battery, most systems shall have
contingencies in place to ensure that the pod either reaches the exit point, or it
comes to a safe stop. (Air Mass Intake System power loss shall be addressed
later
– In case of a sensor and microcontroller failure, the eddy current brakes shall be
engaged and the Pod shall be brought to a complete stop.
– The power-off state of the linear magnetic brakes is engaged, meaning that the
brakes are aligned with the rail to brake the pod. In the event of a power failure, the
clamping brakes will be engaged and left in that state until stored energy expires
completely.
– In the event of a loss of power to the levitation system, the Pod shall continue to the
exit point. The power-off state of the valves is fully open, so stored energy is
released. Additionally, there are safety valves for the pressure system that default to
open unless supplied with power. If the height of the Pod decreases even with these
precautions, the brakes shall be engaged and the Pod brought to a full stop.

71. 71
Description of Safety Features(Cont.)
Recovery Plan
• The Hyperloop shall pressurize. This shall be confirmed by the Pod if the network
connection is still operational.
• The Pod’s External Transport shall enter the Hyperloop and approach the Pod.
• The Pod shall be loaded onto the transport, and wheeled to the Exit Area.
• The SpaceX provided crane shall lift the Pod and Transport System out of the
Hyperloop area.
Implementation of the Pod-Stop command
• Upon receiving the Pod-Stop command, the Pod shall initiate a full stop. The
linear eddy current brake shall engage and slow the Pod down to a speed of 20
mph.
• The linear eddy current brake shall then disengage and the mechanical brake
shall use the middle beam to slow the Pod down to 0 mph.
• At this point, the air mass intake shall decrease, and the Pod will lower to the
ground. The Air Mass Intake System shall then fully shut down.

72. 72
Description of Safety Features(Cont.)
Single Points of Failure
• Loss of power to Air Mass Intake System
– If the Air Mass Intake System ceases to function, the air bearings will fail
– In this scenario, the Pod would strike the aluminum conductor plates on the ground
and damage would most likely occur to the Pod and the Tube
– However, the Pod would not strike the side of the Tube due to the mechanical
suspension system which keeps the Pod centered in the Tube
Rapid Tube Pressurization
• In the case of rapid re-pressurization, the Pod shall be unable to reach the end
point due to increased drag forces
• However, no damage or other adverse effects shall happen to the Pod
– The levitation system is capable of operating at atmospheric conditions

73. 73
Description of Safety Features(Cont.)
Fault tolerance of braking, levitation, and other subsystems
• We have emergency brakes as well as redundant brakes that operate in the
unlikely event that the low-speed or high-speed brakes fail
• In the event of a failure to the air bearings, a feedback control shall cease air-flow
to air bearings and activate brake

74. 74
Description of Safety Features: Failure Mode Effect Analysis
Subsystem Function
Potential Failure
Mode
Potential Effects of
Failure
Severity
Rating
Potential Cause(s) of
Failure
Occurance
Rating
Current Process Control
Levitation System Provide Air Cushion
Fails to provide
necessary airflow for
lift necessary
Will prevent pod from
floating on air cushion
6
Compressor system or
motor failure
2
Control systems for the motor and compressor ensure proper
amounts of airflow to each of the air bearings. Control systems
will be adequately tested prior to flight
Fails to provide each
air bearing with correct
amount of air
Pod will begin to lean
on a specific corner
8
Controller failure or not
enough air flow
through compressor
2
If the air is reduced at a particular air bearing, the pod will begin
to lean in that direction, possibly scraping the aluminum track.
Valve controls and controller subsystems will be adequately
tested.
Structural Frame
Provide a structural
support and distribute
loads
May deform due to
several structural
design case
The structure could
deform or crumple and
thus stop distributing
the loads correctly
8
If the pod were to
crash into a solid
structure
1
Structural frame has had several structural loading design
cases analyzed using computerized methods. This analysis
showed that the structure is well designed to withstand these
loads
May deform due to
vibrations
The structure could
deform or crumple and
thus stop distributing
the loads correctly
7
If the motor or
compressor vibrates at
a very high specific
frequency, it may
cause deformations in
the structure
1
Structural frame has had several vibrational modes analyzed
using computerized methods. This analysis showed that the
structure is well designed to withstand these vibrations with
minimal deformations
Compressor
Provide air intake to
supply mass flow to
the air bearing
levitation system
Failure to power on Pod will fail to levitate 6
Motor not providing
enough power
2
The motor and compressor system will be tested in conjunction
with the levitation system to ensure proper operation
Failure to provide
enough air intake
Pod will fail to levitate
properly
8
Motor not providing
enough power
4
The motor and compressor system will be tested in conjunction
with the levitation system to ensure proper operation
Motor
Provide power to run
the fan
Failure to provide
enough power
Will prevent pod from
floating on air cushion
Battery system
malfunction
4
The motor and compressor system will be tested in conjunction
with the levitation system to ensure proper operation
Failure to power on
Will prevent pod from
floating on air cushion
6 Battery system failure 2
The motor and compressor system will be tested in conjunction
with the levitation system to ensure proper operation
Control Systems
Provide commands to
each controllable
subsystem
Failure to power on
The pod will be unable
to use the subsystems
that require controll
6
Battery system failure
or poor device build
quality
2 Functional tests to ensue that this subsystem behaves properly
Failure to provide
correct commands to
subsystems
The pod will be unable
to use the subsystem
that is not able to be
controlled
8
Battery system failure
or poor device build
quality
2 Functional tests to ensue that this subsystem behaves properly
Navigation System
Provide measurements
and telemetry data
Failure to provide data
Will not meet
requirement of
continuous data
stream
5
Battery system failure
or poor device build
quality
2 Functional tests to ensue that this subsystem behaves properly
Failure to provide
provide correct data
Will not meet
requirement of
continuous data
stream
5
Battery system failure
or poor device build
quality
2 Functional tests to ensue that this subsystem behaves properly
Power System
Provide necessary
power requirements to
subsystems
Failure to provide
necessary power to
subsystems
Will prevent pod from
floating on air cushion
7
Battery system failure
or poor device build
quality
2 Functional tests to ensue that this subsystem behaves properly

75. 75
Component and System Testing Plan
• Subsystem Testing
– Levitation system
– Scale model testing for structural loading
– Fan functional test
– Stability and control systems
– Power systems
• Subsystem Integration and Testing
– Power system and fan system
– Levitation system and fan system
– Levitation and control systems
• System Integration and Test
– Assembly of full pod
– Full functional system test