Empirical investigation of possible concerns regarding the use of magnetic levitation elevators Текст научной статьи по специальности «Электротехника, электронная техника, информационные технологии»

DOI 10.17816/transsyst201843s1165-172

© Kirchner Manuel

University of Applied Sciences (Deggendorf, Germany)

EMPIRICAL INVESTIGATION OF POSSIBLE CONCERN REGARDING THE USE OF MAGNETIC LEVITATIO!

ELEVATORS

lev

solved: Ar

on ntial

ators and, if so, ><v

ay face-to esaid elevator the observation

Aim: This study focused on an issue regarding an innovation of mag elevators which was by different media coverage indicated as being users of magnetic levitation elevators concerned about the safe use of thes what kind of concerns exist?

Methods: To contribute a first scientifically sound assessment to this, a t face survey at the elevator test tower in Rottweil (Baden-Wuerttemberg), where technology is tested, has been conducted. (Touristic) visitors of the tower platform on it have been surveyed a standardized questionnaire.

Results: The results have shown that the average tendency of prospective conceivable users tends to be free of concerns. In addition, a share of about one-sixth has both expressed and concretized concerns. Those relate mainlyto new cnai||||||||l!cs fthis elevator technology -absence of ropes, magnetic levitation, ma aspects such as power loss.

Conclusion: The study provides

Thusly it seems to be particularly similar areas and manufacturer: communicating its prospecti

futu

sting clients

mplem

Keywords: Magle

rs, Concerns

INT

CTION

A levi intended to cars, has Based on cabins to c German li

ed

ly been att

culat

<u

CM

8 S

Q. 00

presence -partially associated with known

lorative contribution to the topic described. )oth researchers willing to look further at this or of the technology in the context of, for instance,

Multi, Prospective Use, Safety

TD О <° "К

fj (Я £= ^

<U (Я

(Я Is-

13

ГО Ö

u

_Q СЛ

<D О

ID ■—

(Л О

(Я TD

magnetic levitation technology, which is s horizontal movement of cable-free elevator tention in industry, mobility sector and public. ernoster, the elevator system should allow several ependently of each other in a shaft circuit. According to its the innovation can be an important factor influencing future cities in the context of advancing urbanization and rising skyscraper

E о

ч—

TD <U О

ra +-'

о го

(Я

.

construction [1].

At the time of this study (November/December 2017) tests were carried out in a company-owned elevator test tower in Rottweil (Baden-Wuerttemberg) [2]. Yet, no persons were allowed to ride in tested prototypes, since qualifying certifications were still outstanding [3, 4].

This article is available under license I

Safety aspects are generally considered to be one of the main challenges in the realization of the technology as new systems and interaction "beyond known concepts [5]" are necessary. Accordingly, when promoting the magnetic levitation elevator phrases like „Fokus auf Sicherheit [1]" („focus on safety") or safety as „Schlüsselbegriff [6]" („key term") are used.

While the general public was dominated by enthusiasm for the progress made possible through this elevator innovation, aspects of safety regarding the potential use occasionally sparked concerns in editorial r following question appeared to be in need of an answe

Are potential users of magnetic levitation elevators concei safe use of these elevators and, if so, what kind of co

, the &/

the

METHODOLOGY & THEO

th fac r in own on

:tical approach

&

ey was chosen as the central itative empirical investigation -istionnaire - was carried out to visitors ttweil.

searching resources as a cause - no :piicitly considered subject matter seemed orientation on the basis of helpful guidelines as well as circumstances for

In a scarcely considered scientific field this work - hereafter presented in highly compressed shape - should enable to formulate a first objective assessment regarding the existence of concerns and their possible manifestations.

CM

8 S

Q. 00

In order to handle the topic adequately, methodology. More specifically, a realized by a standardized face-to-of above-mentioned elevat

Basically - not excludii scientifically founded state of res to exist. Hence, it was necessary to both theoretical topics and, in particular, deve the survey itself.

In Fig. 1 presented key content for the questionnaire arose based on findings from known concerns regarding elevator use, of the value of safety in the exercise of mobility, of technology acceptance tendencies and of individual risk assessment for the use of (new) mobility technologies - combined with an analytical consideration

^the^eisjult;5(3^tj||i||^ubconscious and intuitive assessment of the use by a semantic polarity profile as well as of the open and concrete questioning of possible concerns should enable an answering of the central issue.

CONDENSED RESULTS

In total, 197 persons were questioned the complete questionnaire - almost two-thirds had already heard of the magnetic levitation elevator.

TD О

<° "К

fj ш

£= ^

<U (Я

(Я Is-

13

<0 ö

u

_Q СЛ

<D О

О ТЗ

(Л

.

С

This article is available under license I

Introductory Knowledge-status: magnetic

aspects levitation elevator

Prioritization of values regarding elevator use

Subconscious assessment of concerns regarding a possible use

Harinlessness

Safety'

Familiarity

Controllability

Freedom of risk

Targeted query of possible concerns

)

Ъ/

v

Open questioning

Concrete query: predefined aspects/characteristics

Fig. 1. Substantial-chronological

Central aspects of the survey reveal approaches and results, thematically depi questions.

e of the question

g compressed discussion ng to predefined guiding

How important is the personal value of safety regarding the use of elevators?

)ove

Among five pred in elevator driving by respondents it was the secon least two other Thusly, i some margi findings s would pr or 'feeling s to be important

' the samp st imp

ated as the most important value e. Furthermore, for 24.4 % of the t value while another 25.4 % put at

n overall trend safety appeared to be the dominant feature by lowed by speed, availability, ride comfort and cabin design. The at a large proportion of potential users of maglev elevators

♦ y/

t effectiveness and/or efficiency. Above all, 'being safe' moving quickly and ideally immediately' seems y people in terms of elevator usage.

<D

О <D

™ CM

8 S

Q. 00

13 T-

"O О s ^ <° "K

ш £= ^

<U (Я "О (Я

8 § <0

ч— CD О T-

ф S

(Д Is-:з

<0 ci

_Q СЛ

<u о :з ■— (Я о (Я "О

£ & е£

(3 „ ч= О

-О -о

ф "

о га о го

How does the average potential user subconsciously assess a possible ride with the maglev elevator regarding personal concerns? Are there any differences regarding concerns among potential users and, if so, how do they share proportionally?

Are there any connections between a subconscious assessment of concerns and their concrete questioning and, if so, which ones?

This article is available under license I

As Fig. 2 shows, respondents rated a potential ride with the magnetic levitation elevator as rather harmless with a slight tendency towards the middle. Furthermore, a possible trip was averagely considered fairly safe. Beyond that, interviewees estimated a potential usage between undecided and rather unfamiliar with a slight bias towards the former. Irresolution was dominating in terms of the 'controllability' while the sample average, slightly tending towards the middle, estimated a conceivable ride as rather risk-free.

[CELLRANGE]

[CELLRANGE]

[CELLRANGE]

[CELLRANGE]

[CELLRANGE]

• [CELLRANGE] ¿[CELLRANGE] ^Tft I /—п^т T Л : WGE] I_

1 lll.lv- J» [CELLRANGE] •^CELLRANGE]

1

[CELLRANGE]

V

[CELLRANGE]

[CELLRANGE]

[CELLRANGE]

[CELLRANGE]

1,00

2,00

3,00 Average values

4,00

5,00

Fig. 2. Semantic pro Question: „Please assess from elevator

erspe the fo

■Total sample (N=197)

(N=197) ie with the magnetic levitation istive pairs"

<D

О <D

8 S

Q. 00

"O

10

СЛ С

го

Further analysis showed that the personal assessment of the 'harmlessness', 'safety' and 'freedom of risk' are positively linked in terms of judging a potential trip with a magnetic levitation elevator. Therefore - with a moderately correlated interrelation (r = 0.586, significance level 0.01) - respondents appear to be more likely to assess a possible use as rather safe if they also consider it to be rather harmless connecti

In a difference Rel ere det

о

ГМ +-'

(Л £= ^

<U СЛ "O " О

о го

ч- CD О т-

(Я Is-:з

ГО о о

_Q СЛ

ф о :з ■— (Я о (Я "О

iwise). Similar statements can be made regarding the other irate of dimensions.

onsideration of these overall trends, possible categorical en into account via an individual calculation methodology. polarity profile as in Table 1, the results of each questionnaire sing the following formula:

y = (x . + x .) x 1.0 + (x . + x . + x .) x 0.5

y n v n1 n2' v n3 n4 n5'

(Я

.

Scores ranging from yn = 7.0 to yn = -7.0 were possible and every respondent could be assigned according to predefined categories of concerns. The outcome can be seen in Fig. 3.

This article is available under license I

Table 1. Logic for the individual calculation methodology

x = n 2.0 l.O 0 -l.0 -2.0

x nl harmless D D D D D

x n2 safe D D D D D

xn3 familiar D D D D D

xn4 controllable D D D D D

xn5 riskless D D D D D

Weighting

worrying unsafe

unfamiliar uncontrollab risky

110

100

90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

99

50

39

9

0

free of concerns

Fig. 3. Indi

rather free of concerns

undecided

rather distinctive distinctive concerns concerns

<u

о <u

о с го

of the total sample (N = 197)

In total, 25.4 % could be classified as persons who seemed fundamentally free of concerns on the basis of their subconscious assessment. 50.2 % appeared to be rather free of concerns while nine persons fell into the category 'undecided'. Above that, 19.8 % of the sample appeared to have subconsciously expressed rather existing concerns by answering the polarity profile. Whereas apparently nobody showed strong concerns the following needs to be noted: an application of the calculation to the total sample resulted in a categorization as 'rather free of concerns'.

)eeper analyzes have shown that among people with quite pronounced concerns in about four out of five were able to express these in concrete, thus to substantiate them.

CM

8 S

Q. 00

13 T-

"O О

<° "К

(Я

£= ^

<U СЛ

"О СЛ

'8 § ГО

ч— CD

О T-

(Я Is-:з

ГО Ö

u

_Q СЛ

<D О

13 ■—

(Я О

(Я TD

£ а

e£

о „ о

TD TD

<u " о

го +-'

о го

Which quantitative and qualitative characteristics can be determined by an open questioning of concerns? Are concerns expressed and, if so, which ones?

This article is available under license I

The open questioning resulted in approximately one-third really concretizing aspects with more than half of them already being categorized as not free of misgivings. Below both causes for as well as manifestations of concerns are described.

Most frequently articulated were misgivings regarding suspected effects of power failure on the magnetic field stability (eleven times), followed by the absence of ropes (nine times) and doubts over the influence of magnetic fields on health (six times) of especially regular users and particularly on people with pacemakers (eight times). Furthermore, on a shared fourth place (six felt uncertainty due to the innovation of the technology associated with it as well as unspecified concerns relating to power expressed.

Followed by general doubt over the stability of such mag (four times), concerns thanks to the pending cabins as well as felt to lacking knowledge about the technology itself and concerns re of driving comfort came up as the divided eight place (three most frequently mentioned aspects.

Eventually, with either two or less nominations followed: doubts about the technical/electronical functionality of the system; concerns over possible collisions or crashes of cabins; misgivings towards assumed possibilities of technical influence by "cyber-attacks"; reservations due to assumed negative leverage of magnetic field presence on electronic devices owned by users o f the elevator.

How are concrete and new aspects of magnetic levitation elevator technology assessed with regard to possible concerns?

es each) eral risks would be

7

itation tainty due to aspects each) of the

o;

C\l

8 S

Q. 00

TD О

<° "К

fJ ш

£= ^

<U (Я

(Я Is-

(Я О (Я "О

Tangible aspects which seem to be novel to the user were - as Fig. 4 shows - all on average considered to be largely unobjectionable, especially the locomotion of elevator cars in the horizontal. Nevertheless, there were proportionate differentiations. The presence of magnetic fields, a large number of circulating cabins in the elevator shaft and the absence of cables appeared to be of concern by averagely about one-sixth, while the levitation of the cabins by magnets was considered to be the comparatively most alarming aspect.

lagnetic levitation of cabins' as well as ,Absence of Ropes' could be ranked and defined as significant and correlative content-related (r = 0.592; level of significance 0.01) reasons for concerns. This relationship appears logical since both aspects are often highlighted in public reporting and appear to be related to one another: the lack of ropes results in a certain way from their replacement by the linear motor technology - ergo by ,magnetic levitation'.

This article is available under license I

Magnetic field presence

Absence of rapes

Magnetic levitation of cabins

Horizontal driving of cabins

Many cabins in one shaft

69.5 16.8 13.7

77.1 17.8 5.1

67.0 25.4 S3

1. 0

95.4

73.6 16.8 9.6

o%

10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% ■ harmless ■ worrying I don't know

Fig. 4. Evaluation of predefined characteristics (N = 1 Question: „How do you assess the following aspects

■ the magnetic levitation elevator?"

CONCLUSION

At the time of this study potential u rather free of concerns about the safe use of m by an individual differentiation of concerns could be identified.

On closer inspection a said average trend, in abo proportion as undetermi and clarification of seem to have specifi consist mainly of

2nd appeared to be elevators. However, with more pronounced

a hal ter as

sub

rngh nami it concerns content

)f potential users could be categorized in lpletely free of misgivings and a small isciously expressed reservations ist under a sixth of potential users ter final compression of the data, those rnture:

Health-related concerns due to suspected magnetic field presence Feelings of uncertainty due to mental perception of absence of ropes Concerns raised due to the magnetic levitation of the cabins, in particular with regard to doubted stability of the magnetic fields

sible effects of power outages in general and with regard to the stability of magnetic fields and cabin-maintenance

Using elevators has become part of everyday life for many people. Although >e misgivings about conventional elevator systems, people have become accustomed to the use of elevators as a means of transportation - including potential disadvantages or perceived risks. This might be caused by the fact that characteristics and general conditions of the technology have changed little for a long time.

However, the magnetic levitation elevator technology will bring some new framework conditions whose actual perceptibility during the use itself remains

CD

О CD

О С

CM

8 S

Q. 00

13 T-

"O О

s ™

<° "K

ш

£= ^

CD СЛ

"О СЛ

'8 § CO

ч— CD

О T-

СЛ Is-:з

<o ö u

_Q СЛ

ф О

:з ■—

сл о

СЛ TD

£ а

e£

2 и

ч= О TD TD

eu " о

га +-'

о го

This article is available under license I

to be seen but which are mentally both perceivable and conceivable for potential users.

While a large share of people in this respect seem to be free of thought, for some especially new characteristics and associated perceptions with it appear to lead to thoughts and assessments which primarily differ from traditional feelings related to elevators and partly eventuate in actual concerns.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

References

G),

ThyssenKrupp Elevator AG. MULTI: Der erste seillose Aufzug der Welt [Internet]; n. d.; [cited 2017 Nov 29]. Available at: https://multi.thyssenkrupp-elevator.com/de/. Arnegger P. Applaus für ThyssenKrupps Multi: Die erste Fahrt des ersten seillosen und seitwärts fahrenden Aufzugssystems [Internet]; Neue Rottweiler Zeitung. 2017 Jun 22; [cited 2017 Nov 27]. Available at: https://www.nrwz.de/rottweil/applaus-fuer-

6.

thyssenkrupps-multi-aufzug/173172. Schwan B. Turbolift wird Realität: Aufzug [Internet]; HEISE ONLINE. 2017 Jul 19; heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Turbolift-wi die-Richtung-wechseln-3773967.html. Dierig C. Der seillose Aufzug fäi [cited 2017 Nov 27]. Available at: seillose-Aufzug-faehrt-sogar-seitw Jetter M, Gerstenmeyer S. A Next Ger Gabel J, editors. The Future of Tall: Innovations. Chicago. 2015;104; [cited org/resources/papers/download/2408-a-pdf.

Ära der Aufzugste 2017

ar seit

Die Welt; 2017 Jun 22; aft/article165845614/Der-

on

r9/

ThyssenKrupp kann die Richtung wechseln ited 2017 Nov 27]. Available at: https://www. lealitaet-Aufzug-von-ThyssenKrupp-kann-

(M

8 S

Q. 00

Intern t.de/

Vertical Transportation System. In: Wood A, ction of Written Works on Current Skyscraper 7 Nov 29]. Available at: http://global.ctbuh.

о

ГМ +-'

СЛ >

(Я (Я

(Я Is-:з

ГО о о

_Q СЛ

eration-vertical-transportation-system. ® q

Urban Hub. N [Internet]; n. neue-ara-de

ited

înik-

revolutioniert die Gebäudekonstruktion 4]. Available at: http://www.urban-hub.com/de/ideas/ -revolutioniert-die-gebaudekonstruktion/.

author:

Arts;

;

x.net.

Kirchner M. Empirical investigation of possible concerns regarding the use of magnetic levitation elevators. Transportation Systems and Technology. 2018;4(3 suppl. 1):165-172. doi: 10.17816/ transsyst201843s1165-172

Informatio Kirchner

ORCID: 00 E-mail: Manuki

nuel, Bachelo 1-6067

о

33 w

.

This article is available under license I