24 replies to this topic

[julestheshiba]

I am not sure but it seems like lifts with a vault drive to power it would be slower than lifts with the drive above? Am I correct?

This post has been edited by julestheshiba: 10 April 2016 - 04:07 PM

[RibStaThiok]

Nope.

[NHskier13]

I think it wouldn't have much of a significant difference.

However, the main reason why vaults were phased out ( I think ) would be space ;

Vs

This post has been edited by NHskier13: 03 April 2016 - 09:29 AM

[2milehi]

Please restate your question.

[SkiDaBird]

Are you talking about vault drives? If so, I found 2 forums already, here they are.
http://www.skilifts....lt&fromsearch=1
http://www.skilifts....lt&fromsearch=1

[NHskier13]

Ya know, I totally forgot about those.

It's worth reading though for one main reason ; someone brought up that the overhead drive has the ability to have drive & tension at the same station. That's good if you don't have the money to run wiring to the top but want bottom tensioning I suppose. But if you do have the money to do so, I believe that pulling (top drive) is better than pushing (bottom drive) and something that escapes me a.t.m about bottom tensioning is also better than top.

[2milehi]

NHskier13, on 03 April 2016 - 04:31 PM, said:

Ya know, I totally forgot about those.

It's worth reading though for one main reason ; someone brought up that the overhead drive has the ability to have drive & tension at the same station. That's good if you don't have the money to run wiring to the top but want bottom tensioning I suppose. But if you do have the money to do so, I believe that pulling (top drive) is better than pushing (bottom drive) and something that escapes me a.t.m about bottom tensioning is also better than top.

You can't shoot pool with a rope. A bottom drive pulls on the light side which in turn pulls on the heavy side via the return bullwheel.

[julestheshiba]

SkiDaBird, on 03 April 2016 - 03:49 PM, said:

Are you talking about vault drives? If so, I found 2 forums already, here they are.
http://www.skilifts....lt&fromsearch=1
http://www.skilifts....lt&fromsearch=1

Yes I just forgot what they were called

[Aussierob]

Overhead drives have a power limit. It's about 900-1000HP . If you want to go bigger you need a vault drive to accommodate the larger gearbox and motors.

[snoloco]

Whiteface and Tremblant have Doppelmayr gondolas with overhead drives that are 1,200 hp. Got my information from the lift construction survey. Maybe that number is wrong, but I've ridden both and they have overhead drives.

[NHskier13]

I believe we're talking about lifts with separate fixed grip terminals, not entirely certain ;

[snoloco]

Hunter's Zephyr Express is I believe the only Alpha-Falcon operating in the east. It was originally the Snowlite Express on the front side, but was replaced by a Leitner Poma 6-pack in 2010. It was heavily modified and sent to the west/back side of the mountain to replace two old double chairs.

The original Adirondack Express from Gore Mountain (1984 VonRoll high speed triple) had an overhead drive where the whole unit was mounted on the tension carriage, allowing for both to be at the bottom. It was integrated and not a separate fixed grip drive terminal. The lift was removed after the 2013-2014 season and scrapped soon after. It was replaced by a Leitner Poma HSQ for the 14-15 season.

This post has been edited by snoloco: 08 April 2016 - 05:36 PM

[barnstormer]

Heron built a few drive/tension terminals that are in vaults. Two examples are "B" lift at Bretton Woods, NH and the Red chair at Magic Mountain, VT.

[NHskier13]

Never knew drive tension combo was possible in vaults. How is that done?

[Lift Dinosaur]

barnstormer, on 09 April 2016 - 06:05 AM, said:

Heron built a few drive/tension terminals that are in vaults. Two examples are "B" lift at Bretton Woods, NH and the Red chair at Magic Mountain, VT.

The original E Lift at Copper Mountain, CO (1972) was of the same design. Bottom Drive / Tension in a vault.
Dino

[julestheshiba]

barnstormer, on 09 April 2016 - 06:05 AM, said:

Heron built a few drive/tension terminals that are in vaults. Two examples are "B" lift at Bretton Woods, NH and the Red chair at Magic Mountain, VT.

I think most heron poma lifts have vault drives.

[liftmech]

I assume, Jules, that by 'drive shaft lifts' you're referring to those with the motors in a vault underground. My lift is a detach quad built with a vault. There isn't any way to cram two 700-HP motors, a 1200-HP 12-cylinder diesel, an enormous gearbox, and all the rest of a lift's drive equipment into a standard overhead terminal. It doesn't run any slower for all that.

[liftmech]

NHskier13, on 03 April 2016 - 09:29 AM, said:

I think it wouldn't have much of a significant difference.

However, the main reason why vaults were phased out ( I think ) would be space ;

Vs

They weren't phased out. Both gondolas at Snowbasin (1997-1998 vintage) are vault drives. See my post above for more details as to why one would need a vault.

[snoloco]

I'm pretty sure that none of Poma's Falcon terminals had overhead drives like we're used to seeing today. The drive was always housed in a separate Alpha terminal, or it was a vault drive. From what I understand, all of Poma's Falcon HSQ's with vault drives were top drive. If a lift was bottom drive, it always got the Alpha-Falcon setup.

The Falcon gondola terminals usually had vault drives, but Stowe has an overhead bottom drive on their gondola. It's also part of a larger building, so maybe that gave them the extra space for an overhead drive. The Whistler Village Gondola, as well as the gondolas at Stratton and Aspen use this terminal with a vault drive.

[julestheshiba]

liftmech, on 09 April 2016 - 05:33 PM, said:

I assume, Jules, that by 'drive shaft lifts' you're referring to those with the motors in a vault underground. My lift is a detach quad built with a vault. There isn't any way to cram two 700-HP motors, a 1200-HP 12-cylinder diesel, an enormous gearbox, and all the rest of a lift's drive equipment into a standard overhead terminal. It doesn't run any slower for all that.

Yes that is what I meant I will change the question. Why I thought it would be slower would be due to torque being lost in the vault shaft and the friction from the weight of the bullwheel on the gearbox and everything it is touching.

This post has been edited by julestheshiba: 10 April 2016 - 04:10 PM