You are on page 1of 8

Fakultt Maschinenwesen Institut fr Technische Logistik und Arbeitssysteme

Professur fr Technische Logistik

SCIENTIFIC REPORT
PROFESSORSHIP OF LOGISTICS ENGINEERING
PROF. DR.-ING. HABIL. THORSTEN SCHMIDT
MATERIALS HANDLING TEAM

Safety Assessment - EN 13001-3-2

Prof. Dr.-Ing. habil. Thorsten Schmidt


Dipl.-Ing. Martin Anders

July 2015
FE-TL-35

Safety Assessment - EN 13001-3-2

Content
1

Subject of Evaluation............................................................................................................. 3

Rope drive design previous approaches............................................................................. 3

Service life and lifetime of running wire ropes ...................................................................... 3

Verification procedure with EN 13001-3-2 ............................................................................ 3

Occurring problems............................................................................................................... 4

5.1

Possible misinterpretation of wtot values ..................................................................... 4

5.2

Danger of early rope failure............................................................................................ 4

Recommendations ................................................................................................................ 6
6.1

Option 1: Changing the designations of lr and wtot and implement limitations for lr ...... 6

6.2

Option 2: Classification of the rope force history parameter sr ...................................... 6

6.3

Remarks to multilayer spooling ...................................................................................... 6

Conclusion............................................................................................................................. 7

References ............................................................................................................................ 7

Appendix 1: Exemplary calculation

Report Safety Assessment - EN 13001-3-2


Prof. Dr.-Ing. habil. Thorsten Schmidt, Dipl.-Ing. Martin Anders

2/7

Subject of Evaluation

In 2014 the standard EN 13001 part 3-2 Limit states and proof of competence of wire ropes in
reeving systems [1] became effective. This standard is to be used together with the standard
1 and 2 of EN 13001 Cranes General Design. The following evaluation gives a short
overview about the calculation sequence and the differences to other standards.

Rope drive design previous approaches

The dimensioning of wire ropes and rope drive components (sheaves, drums) can be
performed according to the standards DIN 15020 [2], ISO 4308 [3] or ISO 16625 [4]. The
procedure with c-values or Zp-values and the given limits which consider the frequency of
utilization and the load spectrum lead in any case to a sufficient service life of the wire ropes.

Service life and lifetime of running wire ropes

The service life (time until discard) and the lifetime (time until rope failure) of wire ropes running
over sheaves/drums can be expressed as no. of bending cycles. In several decades of research
and testing ways to estimate the no. of bending cycles that wire ropes can endure under
different levels of stress until discard or rope failure were developed (see Stuttgart method or
Leipzig method acc. to VDI 2358 [5]). Experiences with the applications of wire ropes,
especially cranes, as well as in-house tests of wire rope manufacturers correspond to the
magnitude of estimated numbers of bending cycles. The lifetime of wire ropes is basically
depending on the following parameters: rope forces, D/d ratio, rope construction and further
rope drive design parameters.

Verification procedure with EN 13001-3-2

With this new standard the design of a rope drive with its components by calculating minimum
values for rope and sheave diameters in order to ensure adequate service life is no longer
possible. With chosen rope drive parameters now two verifications have to be performed,
firstly the proof of static strength and secondly the proof of fatigue strength. In both cases a
design rope force is to be compared with a limit design rope force.
The proof of static strength ensures a minimum rope safety factor under consideration of
dynamic factors and the design of the rope drive (diameters, reeving system, breaking load).
This proof does not consider any operation condition like utilization or load spectrum. It ensures
a minimum real safety factor against the minimum breaking load with insufficient endurable
number of bending cycles if the maximum rope force is considered in lifetime estimations. The
level of safety can be compared with crane designs according to the group classification of the
mechanism M1 according to ISO 4301 [6] or Triebwerkgruppen 1Em and 1Dm according to
DIN 15020-1.
The proof of fatigue strength considers the operation parameters such as load spectrum and
frequency of utilization. This consideration is based on rope spectrum factor kr which equals the
load spectrum factor Km according to ISO 4301 and the number of operation cycles C of the
crane during its projected lifetime integrated in the relative number of bending cycles r. Both
influences load spectrum and utilization are combined in the rope force history parameter sr.
The value r is again depending on a number of bending cycles during the design life of a
rope wtot, which is mainly defined by a number of ropes lr which are to be defined for the
design life of the crane. The Annex B of EN 13001-3-2 gives values for lr as a guideline
depending on the type of crane.
Report Safety Assessment - EN 13001-3-2
Prof. Dr.-Ing. habil. Thorsten Schmidt, Dipl.-Ing. Martin Anders

3/7

Occurring problems

5.1

Possible misinterpretation of wtot values

For rope drives verified with the standard EN 13001-3-2 considering the guidance for lr in
annex B of the standard, the real endurable number of bending cycles is much lower than the
calculated number of bending cycles during the design life of a rope wtot. Exemplary lifetime
estimations for wire ropes with acknowledged techniques such as Stuttgart and Leipzig
method show that wtot-values are 7 to 10 times higher (see Figure 1 and Appendix 1).
5.400.000

5.000.000

real no. of bending cycles for discard N


with max. load

4.800.000

real no. of bending cycles for discard N


with load spectrum

4.200.000

no. of bending cycles during the design


life of a rope w_tot

3.600.000
3.000.000

2.500.000

2.400.000

1.666.667
1.250.000
1.000.000
833.333

494.719
270.416

250.991

132.080

189.244

90.356

146.665

68.891

120.240

55.760

102.161

1.800.000

714.286

88.973

46.880

40.464

1.200.000
625.000

78.908

35.608

555.556

70.961

31.802

500.000
64.520

600.000
0

28.737

10

Figure 1: design and real number of bending cycles exemplary calculation Appendix 1

The wtot-values are the result of an arbitrarily chosen number of wire ropes for a given crane
project but not a product of an endurance calculation. The name however may imply that it
represents an actual number of bending cycles of wire ropes in crane operation. This can lead
to a misinterpretation of the service life with the danger of false specification of service
intervals in order to check for discard criteria.
5.2

Danger of early rope failure

An even more serious problem is the lack of limits for the proof of fatigue strength. Due to an
arbitrarily chosen number of wire ropes lr the influences of the load spectrum can be
terminated by simply choosing higher number of ropes in order to reach a small value for sr.
The following chart shows the principle procedure of both verifications (static and fatigue) with
certain remarks about the possibility of manipulation. The standard allows the possibility to
have a heavy load spectrum with much too small safety values due to the fact that the proof of
static strength can become decisive. That can lead to false rope drive design with unexpected,
early rope failure.

Report Safety Assessment - EN 13001-3-2


Prof. Dr.-Ing. habil. Thorsten Schmidt, Dipl.-Ing. Martin Anders

4/7

EN 13001-3-2: Cranes General design Limit states and proof of competence of wire ropes in reeving systems

Proof of static strength


Design rope force

Dynamic factor
Reeving efficiency
Non parallel falls
Horizontal forces

Proof of fatigue strength


Design rope force

Limit design rope force

Minimum breaking load


Minimum rope resistance
factor (static) depending
on D/d ratio

Dynamic factor
Reeving efficiency
Non parallel falls
Horizontal forces

Proof of static strength


Rope force history parameter sr

Leads to a minimum of
real wire rope safety
against M.B.L. with
insufficient endurable no.
of bending cycles

- Rope spectrum factor kr represents the load spectrum of the crane


- vr is the relative number of bending cycles with reference point
wD = 5105

- sr can be manipulated significantly by changing wtot which is defined


by the free definable no. of ropes specified for the design life of the
crane lr
- In the present standard there are no limitations for sr

The proof of fatigue strength can


be easily manipulated to be
positive if lr is chosen properly.
If it is positive with reserve, the
proof of static strength becomes
decisive in any case. The influence
of load spectrums can be avoided.

Limit design rope force

Minimum breaking load


Minimum rope resistance
factor (fatigue)

further influences
Rope force history
parameter

Further influences ff particularly ff1


with
- ff1 should consider the diameters of drum
and sheaves and is limited by minimum D/d
ratio 11,2 and ff1 0,75
- ff1 can be manipulated by changing wtot
which is defined by the free definable no. of
ropes specified for the design life of the
crane lr
- therefore the logical basis for ff1 can not be
seen

Number of bending cycles during the design life of a rope wtot

- wi number of bends per movement


- imax no. of movements per rope
- C total no. of working cycles during design life of the crane
- nmov no. of movements per working cycle
lr The number of ropes specified for the design life of a rope. lr can be chosen freely. The guidance for lr
which is given in Annex B provides arbitrary values for different types of cranes. These given values result
in much too high values for wtot comparing to real endurable number of bending cycles.

Proof of fatigue strength

Report Safety Assessment - EN 13001-3-2


Prof. Dr.-Ing. habil. Thorsten Schmidt, Dipl.-Ing. Martin Anders

5/7

Recommendations

Reflecting the described discrepancies and in order to minimize the effort for making
adjustments, the following options are recommended. Either option 1 or option 2 may give a
solution. In addition the consideration of multilayer spooling is evaluated in 6.3.
6.1

Option 1: Changing the designations of lr and wtot and implement limitations for lr

Performing the proof of fatigue strength with help of the guidance for lr given in annex B of EN
13001-3-2 the results show acceptable safety factors for most cases. However the chosen
number of ropes lr influences the proof of fatigue strength significantly. It is therefore
recommended to limit the number of ropes in annex B. Experiences and service life
estimations for wire ropes show that the resulting number of bending cycles for the design life
of a rope wtot (calculated with lr-values in Annex B [1]) exceeds the real endurable number of
bending cycles of wire ropes significantly. For this reason it is recommended to designate the
values lr and wtot explicitly as theoretical values in order to avoid misinterpretation of wtot.
6.2

Option 2: Classification of the rope force history parameter sr

In order to avoid possible manipulation as described in the chart in section 5.2 a fixed link
between load spectrum, crane utilization and the proof of fatigue strength has to be ensured.
This could be implemented by classifying sr analogous to the stress history parameter s in EN
13001-1 (see Figure 2). Therefore the relative number of bending cycles has to change into a
relative number of rope stress cycles or likewise in order to represent the crane utilization. This
way the sr-value is no longer depending on arbitrary values lr and wtot respectively and a safe
rope drive design can be achieved.

Figure 2: S-classification of the stress history parameter in EN 13001-1 [7]

6.3

Remarks to multilayer spooling

Part of the proof of fatigue strength is the consideration of further influences by implementing
additional factors ff1 to ff7 in section 6.4 of the standard [1]. Factor ff5 shall consider the reduced
rope life in multilayer spooling drums and is depending on the number of movements and the
rope force spectrum (see table 8 in [1]). Depending on all other parameters for a crane project it
is possible that in the end the safety against the minimum breaking load is lower than defined
Report Safety Assessment - EN 13001-3-2
Prof. Dr.-Ing. habil. Thorsten Schmidt, Dipl.-Ing. Martin Anders

6/7

general safety factors for multilayer spooling based on experience in present standards such as
ISO 16625 (ZP-values). Due to the complexity of the influences on the wire rope stresses and
deterioration in multilayer spooling a general sufficient safety factor ensures a reduction of rope
damage. Therefore it is recommended to implement corresponding safety factors for multilayer
spooling already in the proof of static strength in order to ensure a direct connection to the
minimum breaking load of the wire ropes.

Conclusion

In the new standard for rope drives EN 13001-3-2 the basic principle from designing steel
structures as in EN 13001-1 was transferred for the proof of competence of wire ropes. In
contrast to the well-defined S-classification for stresses in part 1, the approach with decisive
value lr in part 3-2 poses a loophole for any user of the standard in order to proof the fatigue
strength as positive. The possible variation of the proof of fatigue strength eliminates the logical
influence of the detailed composition of the further influences in EN 13001-3-2, sections 6.4
and 6.5 (factors ff1 to ff7). The present form of the standard can lead to an undermining of basic
safety principles, which are ensured in other present standards (ISO 4308, DIN 15020,
ISO 16625) for wire ropes and rope drive due to the use of c-values or ZP-values.

References

[1]

EN 13001-3-2: Cranes General Design, Limit states and proof of competence of


wire ropes in reeving systems. 2014.

[2]

DIN 15020-1: Lifting appliances; basic principles for rope reeving components;
computation and design. 1974.

[3]

ISO 4308-1: Cranes and lifting appliances Selection of wire ropes Part 1:
General. 2003.

[4]

ISO 16625: Cranes and hoists Selection of wire ropes, drums and sheaves. 2013.

[5]

VDI 2358: Wire ropes for materials-handling equipment. 2012.

[6]

ISO 4301-1: Cranes and lifting appliances Classification Part 1: General. 1986.

[7]

EN 13001-1: Cranes General Design, General principles and requirements. 2015.

Dresden, 07/21/2015
place, date

Director of institute

Report Safety Assessment - EN 13001-3-2


Prof. Dr.-Ing. habil. Thorsten Schmidt, Dipl.-Ing. Martin Anders

7/7

Appendix 1 exemplary calculation


supported by Steinbach, G. VDI; TSU e.V. - E.- M.- Arndt - Str. 14; D-04425 Taucha

Report Safety Assessment - EN 13001-3-2


Prof. Dr.-Ing. habil. Thorsten Schmidt, Dipl.-Ing. Martin Anders

A1