Inclined lift at Greenford Station replaces the last wooden escalator
 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxScXvX1Dv4

Inclined lift at Greenford Station replaces the lastwooden escalator
 

Basil Jet wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxScXvX1Dv4


Thanks, I had already planned to go and have a look at it next week. It's
been ages in construction.

Only a very few years ago, Greenford was a station with semaphore signals
and a wooden panelled escalator. Now they've both gone, but it's still one
of the very few stations with cross-platform interchange between DMUs and
automatic Tube trains.

Inclined lift at Greenford Station replaces the last wooden escalator
 

Basil Jet wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxScXvX1Dv4

I'm a little surprised that they claim it uses less power than a
conventional lift. If you have to raise a given mass through a
given vertical distance, shouldn't the answer be the same?

Chris
--
Chris J Dixon Nottingham UK


Plant amazing Acers.

Inclined lift at Greenford Station replaces the lastwooden escalator
 

Chris J Dixon wrote:
Basil Jet wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxScXvX1Dv4

I'm a little surprised that they claim it uses less power than a
conventional lift. If you have to raise a given mass through a
given vertical distance, shouldn't the answer be the same?

Yes, I agree about the *energy* consumption. But perhaps it gets away with
a less powerful motor, as it's slower than a normal lift. I assume it has
a counterbalance like a normal lift? I'll see if I can tell when I go to
see it on Monday. Of course, the balance weight may be hidden, as it is
with many normal lifts.

Inclined lift at Greenford Station replaces the last wooden escalator
 

On Sat, 14 Nov 2015 09:03:03 +0000, Chris J Dixon
wrote:

Basil Jet wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxScXvX1Dv4

I'm a little surprised that they claim it uses less power than a
conventional lift. If you have to raise a given mass through a
given vertical distance, shouldn't the answer be the same?


It is a funicular railway, no?

Inclined lift at Greenford Station replaces the last wooden escalator
 

On Saturday, 14 November 2015 01:39:32 UTC, Basil Jet wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxScXvX1Dv4

Why is it not called a funicular?

Inclined lift at Greenford Station replaces the last wooden escalator
 

In message
-sept
ember.org, Recliner wrote:
I'm a little surprised that they claim it uses less power than a
conventional lift. If you have to raise a given mass through a
given vertical distance, shouldn't the answer be the same?

That assumes 100% efficiency in the mechanism. Not a safe assumption.

Yes, I agree about the *energy* consumption. But perhaps it gets away with
a less powerful motor, as it's slower than a normal lift.

In addition, the fact it's sliding down rails rather than hanging in
free space may alter the efficiency of the mechanism.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Mobile: +44 7973 377646 | Web: http://www.davros.org
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

Inclined lift at Greenford Station replaces the lastwooden escalator
 

Offramp wrote:
On Saturday, 14 November 2015 01:39:32 UTC, Basil Jet wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxScXvX1Dv4

Why is it not called a funicular?

Good question. Maybe because it's indoors? I assume it also doesn't run on
railway-style tracks.

Inclined lift at Greenford Station replaces the last woodenescalator
 

On 14/11/2015 09:03, Chris J Dixon wrote:
Basil Jet wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxScXvX1Dv4

I'm a little surprised that they claim it uses less power than a
conventional lift. If you have to raise a given mass through a
given vertical distance, shouldn't the answer be the same?


More efficient and I suspect the actual lift body weighs less than a
wooden escalator.


--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.

Inclined lift at Greenford Station replaces the lastwooden escalator
 

Clive D. W. Feather wrote:
In message
-sept
ember.org, Recliner wrote:
I'm a little surprised that they claim it uses less power than a
conventional lift. If you have to raise a given mass through a
given vertical distance, shouldn't the answer be the same?

That assumes 100% efficiency in the mechanism. Not a safe assumption.

Yes, I agree about the *energy* consumption. But perhaps it gets away with
a less powerful motor, as it's slower than a normal lift.

In addition, the fact it's sliding down rails rather than hanging in
free space may alter the efficiency of the mechanism.

I assume it runs on rollers or guide wheels, rather than sliding. It's at
quite a shallow angle.
See http://democracy.walthamforest.gov.u...pendix%20B.pdf