Drag-based aerodynamic braking system for the Hyperloop: a numerical study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Hyperloop promises to revolutionize the transport infrastructure of the 21st century by reducing travel time and allowing people to reach transonic speed on land. It carries with it the hope of a sustainable transportation system during an era of global energy crisis. Overall passenger safety in a high-speed pod necessitates a reliable braking system. This paper introduces the possibility of utilizing aerodynamic drag in the Hyperloop, anticipated to operate at high Mach and low Reynolds flow regime, to attenuate the speed of the pod. Numerical analysis was conducted to investigate the effect of incorporating an aerodynamic brake at different pod velocities (100, 135, and 150 m/s) and deployment angles (30°, 45°, 60°, and 90°). A detailed comparison between the proposed aerodynamic braking system (AeBS) and existing braking systems for the Hyperloop has been presented in this paper. The results demonstrate an increase in drag value of the pod by 3.4 times using a single 0.15 m2 brake plate. When the brake plate was fully deployed at a pod velocity in excess of 112 m/s, the aerodynamic drag-based braking systems was shown to be more effective than the contemporary eddy current braking system.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".