Professional Documents
Culture Documents
BACKGROUND
Brugg Wire Rope, LLC
Elevator design has changed greatly in the last few decades. This can be attributed not only to the creation of taller buildings and the need to transport their populations more quickly and efciently, but changing societal and scal demands that require them to run nearly continuously. Couple these factors to the need by architects and engineers to use oor space more efciently (and protably) and you can understand the rise of installation designs that require the use of smaller, less bulky (and therefore less robust) components and stronger, more exotic composite hoist ropes (as opposed to old fashioned sisal ropes) which use Parallel and Point Contact designs. It seems like that this 'demassication' trend will only continue in the future. Indeed the entire elevator industry is moving towards creating 'tight systems'which feature smaller diameter drive sheaves, closer sheave placements, and lower safety factors in dynamic rope loads.
Machine Sheave
To Car
To CWT
Ideal Conguration
Arc of Contact
Machine Sheave
Deector Sheave
Phone (US): 1.706.235.6315 Toll free: 866.54BRUGG (542.7844) Fax: 1.706.235.6035 info: elevatorrope@brugg.com www.bruggrope.com Telfono (E.U.): 1.706.235.6315 Llamada gratuita: 866.54BRUGG (542.7844) Fax: 1.706.235.6035 info: elevatorrope@brugg.com www.bruggrope.com
greater specic pressures within the sheave itselfwhich can lead to accelerated wear of the sheave, wire fatigue and hoist rope breakage. Indeed such wear can be very signicant as analyses performed using Brugg RLP (Rope Life Prediction an online application based on the works of Dr. Klaus Feyrer of the University of Stuttgart) reveal that an undercut of 75can reduce rope life by 60%, while an undercut of 105reduce rope life by as much as 93.4%. Clearly, the increase in traction provided by undercuts are balanced by a signicant trade-off in reduced rope life. V-Groove/Undercut V-Groove Drive Sheave with Undercut U-Grooves for four ropes Both V and Undercut V-Groove (also known as the Progressive V-Groove) designs offer even greater amounts of traction to installation designers. However this design also creates higher specic pressures within the groove, and stresses and distorts the hoist rope. Naturally this negatively impacts rope life expectancy.
The Positioning of the Secondary Sheave Has A Critical Impact on Sheave Wear and Rope Life
Modern elevator designers are constantly working to create installations that use oorspace more efciently. These compact designs frequently utilize less massive components, more challenging groove proles, and often demand the close placement of secondary, deector sheaves and primary sheave. This necessitates the implementation of complex roping arrangements and the use of multiple sets of sheaves. Such conditions often compromise rope performance dramatically by increasing the number of rope bending cycles and creating improper eet angles. This in turn leads to greater system operating stresses, which can negatively impact sheave surface wear, rope performance and hoist rope life expectancy. Bending Cycles Many professionals fail to appreciate that hoist ropes are not single static pieces of wire but are carefully crafted machines bearing a surprising number of moving parts. Each rope is made up of strands of wire. These are composed of bundled collections of smaller wires that are helically wound together. Each rope must work in harmony with the surrounding equipment. To illustrate the complexity of the matter, consider that a single 8 x 19 Seale hoist rope is basically composed of 152 parts (8 strands, 19 wires per strand). All these parts are composed of soft steel that must be strong, relatively lightweight and exible which poses a real engineering challenge. In addition, bear in mind that hoist ropes are constantly in motion; bending over a sheave (frequently multiple sheaves), adjusting to stresses and then straightening out again. And this process is carried on often for millions of cycles. It should come as no surprise that this exponential rise in bending cycles has resulted in a corresponding increase in elevator breakdowns and decrease in rope life expectancy. To address this fact some manufacturers have developed new rope designs and are using advanced,
32- 40
V-Groove
Undercut V-Groove
In contrast to the Round or U-Groove, the V-Groove's degree of undercut dramatically increases specic pressures placed on the hoist rope and creates specic areas of contact that can be identied by pronounced crown wear on the surface of outer wires.
The angle for a V-Groove is usually 30 but can go as high as 38, while an Undercut-V may range between 32-45 (measured as the included angle of both sides of the groove). V-Grooves are often used for installations of speeds up to 157.5 ft/m and higher (or less than or equal to 0.8 m/s), while Undercut V-Grooves are more commonly used with slower speed elevators carrying heavier loads. Using Brugg RLP (Rope Life Prediction), studies show that an Undercut V-Groove featuring an undercut of 35 can shorten rope life by as much as 94.6%, while a 45undercut can decrease rope life by 75%.
Phone (US): 1.706.235.6315 Toll free: 866.54BRUGG (542.7844) Fax: 1.706.235.6035 info: elevatorrope@brugg.com www.bruggrope.com Telfono (E.U.): 1.706.235.6315 Llamada gratuita: 866.54BRUGG (542.7844) Fax: 1.706.235.6035 info: elevatorrope@brugg.com www.bruggrope.com
innovative materials in rope construction. However there is a practical limit as to how far one can go to create a rope that can totally withstand increased bending cycles. For while it is theorectically possible to construct a nearly indestructible rope, such a rope would be far too unwieldy to install, expensive to maintain, and far too rigid for practical use as a exible support medium. Indeed such a rope would be nearly useless to all, as it is only through a careful examination of rope wear that one can determine the existence and cause of even larger problems with surrounding machinery. Clearly, our industry's preference in utilizing installation designs that place secondary sheaves within close proximity of the drive sheave, and the steady rise in public elevator usage (due to societal and economic factors), can only mean that problems due to increased bend cycles will only increase. Fleet Angles Technically speaking, the angle between the rope axis and the radial plane of the pulley is called the 'eet angle.' Simply put, a eet angle is a measure used to describe the angle of a rope as exits from one sheave (the main traction sheave) to connect with another sheave (the deector or secondary sheave). This angle must be carefully monitored and remain relatively shallow for an installation to work properly. Too wide an approach angle and the hoist rope will rub up against the side of the side of the sheave groove (the anges), leading to increased wear on one plane of the rope, resulting in exaggerated rope wear and premature rope death. For instance a 4 eet angle can reduce rope life by as much as 33%. Close placement of secondary sheaves and the drive sheave results in high eet angles, which induces rope torsion and cause the rope to roll into sheave grooves. Incorrect alignment of sheaves present serious problems for rope life expectancy and sheave performance. Close sheave congurations, or the failure to thoroughly consider the impact of high eet angles
during the design and installation process results in excessive bending cycles for the ropes and higher overall system operating stresses on all components.
Sheave Groove Wear versus Rope Wear: a relationship that tends to wear on each.
One quickly nds that discussing sheave groove wear without simultaneously addressing the topic of rope wear is a fruitless endevour. Indeed it can be said that no other pairing of components has such such a profound impact upon the wellfare and performance of the other. As detailed previously, the type of sheave groove used has a dramatic impact on the amount of specic pressures and the kind of stresses placed upon the rope itself. Modern aggressive groove angles (featuring dramatic undercuts) coupled with roping arrangements featuring reverse bends, and close placements of secondary sheaves, create unforgiving conditions where rope cross sections actually deform under load conditions. How this occurs is detailed in the various enclosed illustrations we have provided. However the key point to understand is that once a new rope has been placed into a grooove, stresses naturally wear down the diameter of the rope, forcing it to settle more deeply into the groove. Simultaneously, as the rope withdraws into the groove, the sheave groove surface is worn as well. Consequently should a new rope be placed into the worn groove (even if the new rope matches the older rope in every detail), the more corrupted groove will accomodate the rope poorly and lead to shortened rope life expectancy. This is a natural sequence of events. And, despite what some professionals choose to believe, this continuous cycle of rope and groove wear, and premature rope death, has absolutely nothing to do with modern rope construction, rope design, or the type of materials used in rope composition today.
Areas of increased wear where hoist rope crown wear will be evident.
Fleet Angles induce torsion into hoist ropes, causing them to roll into sheave grooves.
A.
New Groove with New Rope
B.
Worn Groove with Worn Rope
C.
New Rope (Replacement) in Worn Groove
Phone (US): 1.706.235.6315 Toll free: 866.54BRUGG (542.7844) Fax: 1.706.235.6035 info: elevatorrope@brugg.com www.bruggrope.com Telfono (E.U.): 1.706.235.6315 Llamada gratuita: 866.54BRUGG (542.7844) Fax: 1.706.235.6035 info: elevatorrope@brugg.com www.bruggrope.com
This drawing details the natural progression of groove wear after a new rope is installed on a new sheave. Over time the rope and groove wear together. This results in a loss of rope diameter and the simultaneous retreat of the rope within the groove channel (creating both a deeper and narrower groove channel than). Should the corrupted groove host a new ropewithout the groove being regrooved, or the entire sheave being replaceda mismatch between rope diameter and groove shape/diameter will occur. This will be marked by evidence of early crown wear, wire breaks on the rope, shortened rope life, and poor system performance overall.
Rdn
Rdw
Rdr
Round/U-Groove
Undercut U-Groove
Undercut V-Groove
Round/U-Groove
Certainly manufacturers have managed to counteract these effects somewhat by creating new compositonal materials, construction processes and structural designs in hoist rope. However these measures have also created issues of their own, such as increased rope weight, not to mention the cost of more advanced ropes (and the attention care that must be taken to install and maintain them properly). No matter how much attention manufacturers pay to rope design, they are helpless should maintenance professionals fail to adequately and routinely lubricate and tension hoist ropes. Other than a basic quantity of lubricant applied in the factory, and general suggestions on tensioning, the matter is largely out of their hands. And the impact of tensioning and lubrication is not insubstatial. For they can, (either by themselves or in combination with other With Brugg GDC factors) severely impact rope one can gauge life, and drastically affect groove depth variances, as well sheave groove integrity as as calculate altered well. Such conditions create a pitch diameters multiplicative effect, where one and rope traveling factor impacts another and distances. creates consequences far more damaging that it could by itself. Indeed, such basic matters such as lubrication and tensioning can create conditions where a rope can actually le into a groove, slicing through the hardened outer casing of the sheave. If this situation is left unaddressed (with either the sheave being regrooved, or the sheave being totally replaced) the widening discrepency between sheave groove diameter and rope diameter will lead rope slippage, rope failure, loss of system peformance and decreased rope and sheave life.
Undercut U-Groove
The rst drawings detail the long-term effects of sheave groove and rope interaction, while the lower images detail the natural impact of loads placed upon ropes. The development of an ovoid cross section can be addressed through various remedies, the most efcient being the substitution of high-performance hoist ropes for Sisal Core ropes. Undercut V-Groove
Phone (US): 1.706.235.6315 Toll free: 866.54BRUGG (542.7844) Fax: 1.706.235.6035 info: elevatorrope@brugg.com www.bruggrope.com Telfono (E.U.): 1.706.235.6315 Llamada gratuita: 866.54BRUGG (542.7844) Fax: 1.706.235.6035 info: elevatorrope@brugg.com www.bruggrope.com
PD
PD
PD
Visual A
Visual B
Visual A details both the exterior view and a cross section of a single groove of an elevator sheave. The Pitch Diameter (PD) is the contact point between rope and sheave groove. Visual B illustrates how a small variation in groove depth equates into a difference in Pitch Diameter. Despite the fact that that both of the ropes are moving at the same speed, the discrepency
in groove depth means that the ropes do not travel equal distances. Although the individual difference in distances traveled by the ropes may seem insignicant, over time this condition will lead to excessive rope wear, a loss of system performance and continued sheave/groove degradation, which further exacerbates the problem.
Bending Cycles*
original
1st
2nd
3rd
4th
to the original rope's specications. This is dramatically illustrated in the chart labeled "Impact of Worn Groove On Estimated Hoist Rope LIfe". That this situation is even a problem in our industry today is due to a conuence of factors: sheave and rope manufacturers have not fully cooperated together to nd solutions for the problem; a failure by rank and le members to invest the time and effort necessary to throw aside old industry maxims and keep informed; when confronted by the expensive cost of changing a sheave versus replacing a rope, short term nancial concerns take precedence.
performanceneither case is true. The idea that today's ropes are simply too hard for modern sheaves is categorically untrue. As we have shown, there are factors that have far greater impact upon sheave and rope life, than some ctional clash of the original metal casting of the sheave versus the hardness of outer strand wires. If the original metal casting for the sheave is made correctly (and this means meticulously controling the chemistry and cooling rate of the drive sheave blank when the casting is poured), and the rope is properly matched, intstalled and maintained, then the possibility of a rope proving to be too hard becomes less than negiligible.
Visual C
Phone (US): 1.706.235.6315 Toll free: 866.54BRUGG (542.7844) Fax: 1.706.235.6035 info: elevatorrope@brugg.com www.bruggrope.com Telfono (E.U.): 1.706.235.6315 Llamada gratuita: 866.54BRUGG (542.7844) Fax: 1.706.235.6035 info: elevatorrope@brugg.com www.bruggrope.com
Visual C reveals how successive generations of ropes placed on sheaves with unequal groove depths can have life expectancies impacted in an inversely proportional manner. No matter how closely one tries to match the original specications of rope initially placed upon a sheave, this pattern is inevitable. And though replacing the initial rope with a high performance rope can delay the occurance of subsequent reropings somewhat, the replaced rope will never match the longevity of the rst set of ropes used.
The myth of our times Elevator ropes are just too hard for todays sheaves.
Over the decades some have encouraged the idea that hoist ropes (featuring outer strand wires in tensile strengths in MPa of 1180, 1370, 1570 and 1770) are too hard for sheaves. This is not only unkind to sheave manufacturers, as it encourages the view that they are unresponsive to new challenges in elevator design, but it fosters a view that rope manufacturers are blithely creating ropes that stress strength above