31 views

Uploaded by api-3733260

save

You are on page 1of 10

)

1

Nonlinear Dynamics of High-Speed Transport for Staple Yarns

**Leader: Bhuvenesh C. Goswami, Expertise—Textile Processes
**

Email: gbhuven@clemson.edu

Team Eric Austin/Clemson/ema@clemson.edu/Mechanical Engineering

Members: Darren Dawson/Clemson/ddarren@clemson.edu/Electrical Engineering

Barrie Fraser/U. Sydney/barrief@maths.usyd.edu.au/Applied Mathematics

Graduate Srinivasa Raghavan Ramaswami, James Gibert, Vilas Kumar Chitrakaran

Students: Pavani Akula, Bhushan Thakar, Amolprasad Kulkarni

URL: people.clemson.edu/∼gbhuven/

Goal

The primary objective of this project is to develop and validate computer models of high-

speed textile systems that transports nonuniform yarns. The present study focuses on staple

yarns and considers the various yarn structures made on diﬀerent systems (e.g., ring, open-

end, and vortex spinning technologies). Successful completion of this project will provide

accurate, experimentally veriﬁed computer models for high-speed yarn transport systems.

The computer models will enable textile engineers to use computer-aided design to optimize

the quality and productivity of high-speed yarn transport systems.

Abstract

Over-end winding is fundamental to many operations in the textile industry. It is important

to understand the path of yarn as it slides across the package between the point where it de-

viates from its original winding angle and the point where it leaves the package. Staple yarns

are inherently uneven and hairy, and these are among the aﬀect the sliding motion of the

yarn on the package. As a starting point, we followed methods proposed by researchers under

a previous NTC contract for determining a coeﬃcient of friction between the sliding yarn

and the package. While our results are qualitatively good, these, along with improved image

processing, have raised questions about certain assumptions contained in the mathematical

formulation.

1 Introduction

Unwinding yarn from a package is one of the fundamental processes in converting the yarns

into fabrics or in sewing. Germination of modern technologies promises high-speed produc-

tion and better quality. Over-end unwinding of yarns from large packages such as cones and

cheeses is most common since it supports high-speed withdrawal of the material. Fluctua-

tions in the yarn tension during unwinding is one inherent factor that leads to an increase in

yarn breakage rate at higher speeds, eventually resulting in poor productivity and quality.

It becomes imperative to study the dynamics of yarns during unwinding for better under-

standing and controlling the process of unwinding to achieve a better quality product with

higher productivity.

**National Textile Center Annual Report: November 2002
**

NTC Project: F01-CL04 (formerly F01-C04)

2

1.1 Background on Unwinding

1.1.1 Early History

**The study of unwinding of yarns has been the subject of many researchers for more than
**

ﬁve decades. Early researchers studied the balloon mechanics and the dynamics involved in

the spinning of yarns in ring and cap spinning [1]. Mack[2] explained the eﬀect of air drag in

the spinning balloons, but he considered that eﬀect to be small. Later, Hannah[1] conducted

a detailed study of the theory on the spinning balloons and showed the mathematical cal-

culations that predicted the shape and tension of the balloon in normal cap spinning. She

considered the centrifugal force due to rotation and the air drag but ignored the weight of

the yarn during calculations.

Padﬁeld ﬁrst developed the theory of unwinding balloons from cylindrical packages in

1958[3]. She found that balloons unwinding from cylindrical packages vary in size and shape

and are diﬀerent from the balloons in spinning, since the point at which the yarn leaves

the package moves up and down the length of the package. She developed the fundamental

equations of motion of an element in the yarn path from the eyelet to the lift-oﬀ point

(deﬁned as region 1) and from the lift-oﬀ point to the unwinding point (region 2).

In 1957, Booth[4] studied the eﬀect of yarn sliding over the package surface during un-

winding. He showed that the variation in the sliding length and the shape of the curve during

sliding would cause tension variations during unwinding. Given the tension of winding and

the speed of the thread, he also showed that there is a limiting value of the angle at which

the thread leaves the spool.

Padﬁeld[5] explained in 1955 that the coeﬃcient of friction is likely to depend on the

structure of the package surface, i.e., on the way the layers of yarn are built up. Even though

she was aware that the kinetic coeﬃcient of friction would be more suitable in this case, she

discussed only the static coeﬃcient of friction. She concluded that there is no systematic

shift in static coeﬃcient of friction with decreasing package radius. She also observed that,

except for very small eﬀective loads, the coeﬃcient of friction decreases slowly with load.

1.1.2 Recent History

**In 1992, Fraser, Ghosh, and Batra[6] used a regular perturbation expansion to provide a the-
**

oretical framework for Padﬁeld’s ideas and removed the time dependence from the equations

of motion. They were also successful in integrating the solution for the yarn slipping on the

package and the yarn in the balloon. They concluded that the tension in the yarn lying on

the package increases from the residual tension in the yarn left in the package towards the

unwind point and that the yarn slides on the package until the tension and tangent angle are

right for it to ﬂy oﬀ the surface. The paper did not address the problem of what happens

when the lift-oﬀ point falls oﬀ the end of the package as the unwind point moves towards the

guide eye at the end of the package. Later Fraser[7] also studied the eﬀect of yarn elasticity

on balloon radius and yarn tension. He made numerous calculations with diﬀerent values for

air drag and elasticity and concluded that the yarn tension and balloon radius reduce when

yarn elasticity is taken into account. However, this eﬀect is only pronounced for elastomeric

yarns.

**National Textile Center Annual Report: November 2002
**

NTC Project: F01-CL04 (formerly F01-C04)

3

**Historically, it has been diﬃcult to measure some of the parameters that are required for
**

validating the mathematical model. In particular, the ratio between rotational and linear

velocities that arises due to the nonzero winding angle of the package and the coeﬃcient of

friction between the yarn and the package in the sliding region. Recently, Wu[8] developed

an algorithm to determine this coeﬃcient of friction the help of an experimental apparatus

that can capture the tension, rotation rate, and package image simultaneously. Kong et al.

[9] developed models that could predict the yarn tension and the motion in the unwinding

balloon and on the package surface. The models depend on the package diameter, wind-on

angle, coeﬃcient of friction, transport speed, air drag, and material properties of the yarn.

These authors also studied the eﬀect of coeﬃcient of friction on the sliding motion of the

yarn on the package surface. He determined that a higher coeﬃcient of friction shortens

length of yarn that slides on the package.

Wu et al. [10] reported that the coeﬃcient of friction was found to increase for textured and

ﬁlament yarns when the speed of withdrawal was increased from 500 to 1000 meters/minute.

They also found that the coeﬃcient of friction for textured yarns is signiﬁcantly higher than

the fully drawn ﬂat yarns. They developed a friction-measuring instrument based on an

Instron Tensile Tester that provided quantitative agreements with the in-situ measurement

at low tensions. The coeﬃcients of friction reported from the Instron-based device were

higher than those obtained from the unwinding analyzer setup due to the higher stick-slip

force or to the low speed of the crosshead speed of the Instron tensile tester.

Recently Clark et al. [11] argued that the eﬀects of bending and twisting stiﬀness are

conﬁned to a small boundary layer in the neighborhood of the unwind point, and thus they

contend that it is valid to model most of the yarn path as a simple string. They also

concluded that the motion of the unwind point on the package is asymmetrical with respect

to its direction of unwinding motion on the package surface.

**2 Activities During the Past Year
**

2.1 Unwinding Test Stand

There was a substantial eﬀort during this past year to reassemble the unwinding analyzer

(shown in Figure 1) and rewrite all the software needed to acquire and postprocess the image

data. Several improvements were made to the setup, and there are several still to be made.

At this stage we are focusing on the path of the yarn on the package, and this has proven

to be a more diﬃcult task for the staple yarns than for the yarns tested previously [10].

There were many issues with the software needed to acquire and process the images with

the high-speed camera, and these were more challenging than the mechanical issues.

The original motivation[8] for incorporating an image capturing subsystem in the test rig

was to automatically detect the path as well as the unwind and lift-oﬀ angles of the unwinding

yarn on the package. Capturing snapshots of yarn unwinding from a package at speeds of

1000 meters per minute or more requires a camera with a fast shutter speed. Our system

uses the DALSA CAD6-256W high-speed digital camera capable of frame rates of up to 955

Hz. However such high frame rates come with a compromise on image quality. The 260×260

**National Textile Center Annual Report: November 2002
**

NTC Project: F01-CL04 (formerly F01-C04)

4

Tension

Sensor

Package Infrared Evenness Hairiness Container

Sensor Sensor Sensor

Eyelet

Yarn

Withdrawal

Device

Camera

Figure 1: Unwinding test stand.

**pixel resolution that the CAD6 provided was found to be inadequate to reliably detect the
**

unwinding yarn over the similarly colored background of the package. One solution was to

restrict the ﬁeld of view (FOV) of the camera so that it was looking only at a section of

the package instead of the whole length of the package. While this helped in viewing the

package in ﬁner detail, we had to accept a very low yield of useful images from the large

set of captured images due to the fact that in many cases the unwinding/lift-oﬀ points fell

outside the FOV of the camera at the instant of image capture, and hence were not visible in

the image. We are currently investigating better methods for triggering the camera so that

the camera ﬁres only when the path of the unwinding yarn falls in its ﬁeld of view. (The

current setup triggers the camera at the instant the tension in the yarn crosses a threshold

value).

All control, image acquisition, and processing operations are implemented on a single

PC to reduce system complexity and costs. However this also places a large computational

load on the PC. We are unable to make full use of the high frame rate of the camera due

to the fact that it totally overwhelms the resources of the PC. Also, image processing is a

highly processor intensive task when all processing operations are implemented in software.

Higher frame rates are possible if the computational load on the main processor is reduced

by programming the framegrabber hardware (RoadRunner 24M) to take care of certain low

level processing operations such as pixel data re-ordering and thresholding. Therefore we

are also working on developing better device drivers for the framegrabber board in order to

make full use of its hardware capabilities.

The system is currently implemented using QMotor 3.0, which is a complete environment

for implementing control strategies and developed by Controls and Robotics group at Clem-

son University. The system provides data logging and plotting capabilities besides online

parameter tuning. Although the current user interface is functional, we would like to work

to integrate data acquisition, display and processing into a graphical user interface (GUI)

**National Textile Center Annual Report: November 2002
**

NTC Project: F01-CL04 (formerly F01-C04)

5

that is more intuitive and productive to the end-user of the system.

**2.2 Formulation and Solution of the Equations of Motion
**

Rewriting the software gave us a chance to reexamine the role the image taken of the yarn

path plays in determining the coeﬃcient of friction from the math model. Our view of the

equations for the yarn path on the package starts with Fraser[6] and ends with Wu[8]. Our

goal was to implement Wu’s approach to determine the coeﬃcient of friction for staple yarns.

Wu’s formulation of the quasi-steady equation of motion,

d dr dr

(1 − p) − 2λk × + λ2 k × (k × r) = f, (1)

ds ds ds

and all other details can be found in references [8] and [10]. Wu expressed a scalar version

of Equation 1 as

(1 − p) xss = λ2 x − 2λys + ps xs + η (λy + xs ) + xq (2)

(1 − p) yss = λ2 y − 2λxs + ps ys − η (λx − ys ) + yq (3)

(1 − p) zss = ps zs + ηzs , (4)

**where ( )s indicates diﬀerentiation with respect to nondimensional arc length s. Wu cast
**

these as six state equations and used a Runge-Kutta algorithm to integrate them from the

lift-oﬀ point to the unwind point. The six initial conditions were determined from an image

taken of the package, and the “correct” path was determined by changing the coeﬃcient of

friction iteratively until both the sliding height, h, and the angle φu matched what was seen

on the image (see Figure 2).

sliding height

h

fU

unwind point

s

liftoff point

fL

Figure 2: Path of the yarn between the lift-oﬀ and unwind points.

**On the surface of the package, the equation (nondimensionalized to the package radius)
**

x + y 2 = 1 acts like a constraint. Thus, Equations 2 and 3 are not independent, and

2

**combining them leads us back to Fraser’s formulation in 1992[6]. Fraser’s formulation yields
**

a ﬁrst integral in the tension, p(s), and Wu followed Fraser (who followed Booth[4]) in solving

for the tension along the yarn path on the package in closed form. This last step is only

possible if the assumption of a zero wind-on angle is enforced.

**National Textile Center Annual Report: November 2002
**

NTC Project: F01-CL04 (formerly F01-C04)

6

**Similar to Wu, we determine the yarn path by integrating the following equations of
**

motion along the path between the lift-oﬀ and unwind points.

d −µq (1 − θs ) /2 (θs + 1) d

(θs ) = (θ) = θs (5)

ds 1−p ds

d ps θs + µq (1 − θs ) /2 d

(zs ) = (z) = zs (6)

ds 1−p ds

d

(p) = −µq (1 − θs ) /2, (7)

ds

where

µq

η=√ and q = 2λθs − λ2 − (1 − p) θs2 . (8)

λ2 − 2λθs + 1

Fraser et al. [6] suggested the state equations be solved by a shooting method, where here

only the coeﬃcient of friction (COF) can be changed to improve the accuracy of the “shot.”

Thus, the image is only needed to provide the initial conditions for the state equations at

L and target values to match at point U. We chose diﬀerent values than either Kong[12] or

Wu[8], and the work on this subject will be ﬁnished during this contract year. We followed

the methodology outlined by Wu[8, 10] for determining a coeﬃcient of friction, and this is

shown schematically in Figure 3. The camera and a strobe light are triggered in Step 1

U

x Unwind Point

L

x Lift Point

Step 4

compare paths chosen

by the used and predicted state equations

by the mathematics

EOM integrated iteratively

Camera to find coefficient of friction

that matches the chosen

conditions at unwind point

Step 2 Step 3

Step 1 h

z = f1(h,z)

PC z

q = f2(h,z)

determines initial values

Frame grabber

user chooses yarn path for state equations

plus unwind and liftoff points

Figure 3: Flow of data from the yarn spool to the coeﬃcient of friction.

**(see Figure 3) to capture the image. At speeds of about 600 meters/min, the image will be
**

blurred if a strobe is not used. The user chooses points on the path of the yarn in Step 2,

including his/her best estimate of the unwind and lift-oﬀ points. Transformations that take

into account the distance to the spool from the camera are used to create both initial values

at the lift-oﬀ point (L) and “target” values at the unwind point (U) in Step 3. Finally, the

equations of motion are integrated from L to U in Step 4 assuming some value for the COF.

**National Textile Center Annual Report: November 2002
**

NTC Project: F01-CL04 (formerly F01-C04)

7

**If the COF is correct, the path predicted by the mathematics will correspond exactly with
**

what was captured on the image. This is very unlikely using the ﬁrst guess for the COF,

so Wu[8] outlines a bisection scheme that converges to a COF that best matches the sliding

height, h, and the unwind angle, φu , both shown in Figure 2. Figure 4 shows how the ﬁnal

sliding height h

**curvefit from image
**

Unwind Point

predicted by math

Lift-off Point

Figure 4: Measured versus predicted path between the lift-oﬀ and unwind points.

**“converged” predictions of the yarn path compare with an example curve ﬁt from the image.
**

The × markers represent points actually chosen by the user. Both paths start out identical

at L due to the initial conditions, and both share the same sliding height, h, and lift-oﬀ

angle, φL . However, close inspection shows that the two paths are not coincident near the

unwind point. Nonetheless, the integration scheme has done its job correctly.

The wind angle φ is a useful measure of yarn orientation, but it is our suspicion that the

angle φu is a poor choice for a quasi-boundary condition. The mathematics that transforms

image to physical coordinates shows that we must compute the slopes of the yarn path near

both the lift-oﬀ and unwind points. Kong[12] found these derivatives in physical coordinates

by choosing two closely spaced points near both U and L. Wu[8] did curve ﬁts in physical

coordinates at each end using about ﬁve points each near U and L. Our approach was to

curve-ﬁt all the points chosen by the user in image coordinates. Typically, either a quadratic

or cubic curve was ﬁt through the points. While a higher order curve would come closer

to more of the points, it would not produce a physical yarn path and the slopes of the line

would vary greatly over even a short distance.

2.3 Findings to Date

The most substantial ﬁndings are soon to be published in the master’s thesis written by

Ramaswami[13]. The author made the following conclusions on the eﬀects of yarn count,

hairiness, and evenness on coeﬃcient of friction at a withdrawal speed of 600 meters/min.

**1. Yarn tension at the eyelet increases as the package diameter reduces.
**

2. Yarn tension, at the eyelet, does not have any signiﬁcant relationship with the hairiness

or unevenness in the yarns.

3. Yarn tension at the eyelet reduces, as the count gets ﬁner.

**National Textile Center Annual Report: November 2002
**

NTC Project: F01-CL04 (formerly F01-C04)

8

**4. Coeﬃcients of friction for staple yarns, measured at 600 meters/minute, are consistently
**

higher than textured and ﬂat ﬁlament yarns.

5. Coeﬃcients of friction between yarn and the package at the intermediate circumference

tends to stay higher.

6. At the intermediate circumference of the package, coeﬃcient of friction has an inverse

relation to the count, i.e., it increases as the count gets ﬁner.

7. Hairiness of the yarns has a pronounced eﬀect, on coeﬃcient of friction, at the core of

the package for hairy yarns.

**There were also many lessons learned about performing these experiments with staple
**

yarns.

**1. is it more diﬃcult to detect the lift-oﬀ and unwind points
**

2. the yarn is so thin that measurement of the angular rotation is diﬃcult using an IR

sensor

3. the frame grabber can not keep up with the high-speed camera

4. the high frame rate of the current camera was not worth the resolution we lost

5. the procedure for synchronizing the strobes and camera to the trigger signal needs to

be improved

6. the way we trigger image capture has to be improved

**3 Ongoing and Future Activities
**

Learning from our lessons, we need to address several shortcomings of the existing measure-

ment system as well as integrate the new hairiness and evenness sensors. We need to get

better resolution in the images that we capture, even if that is at the expense of speed. Speed

in this case means frames per second, and it seems that most any PC we could get would

limit the overall speed of image capturing. We do not need a movie; we need very clear

images triggered when the yarn is in view of the camera. Some other ongoing and future

issues are discussed below.

**3.1 Better measurement of the angular velocity
**

Most researchers we have seen during this work follow de Barr’s[14] assumption that the

spinning yarn at a constant rate. Thus, the angular acceleration of the coordinate systems

that rotates with the lift-oﬀ point is assumed to be zero. If we could improve the method by

which we determine the angular velocity of the yarn path, we could determine the angular

acceleration by diﬀerencing numbers. Figure 1, with might be able to get both the velocity

and its slope (the acceleration) at the time when the image is taken.

**National Textile Center Annual Report: November 2002
**

NTC Project: F01-CL04 (formerly F01-C04)

9

**3.2 Solution of the Nonlinear Equations of Motion
**

There is uncertainty introduced into the problem every time a human being chooses points

from the image with “mouse clicks.” As discussed in Section 2.2, researchers have determined

the target for their shooting method by diﬀerent methods. We are currently assessing how

errors in choosing points propagate through the equations and show up in the estimate of

the coeﬃcient of friction. We are will also look at whether it is better to choose the COF by

minimizing the error between the image and predicted paths over it’s entire length.

**3.3 String vs. Beam Theory
**

Clark et al. [11] presented an analysis in which they hypothesized that a string model of

the yarn was valid everywhere except in a region very near the unwind point. However, this

does not seem to be born out by images taken during this past year. We would now like

to explore the hypothesis that the degree to which the sting acts like a beam rather that a

string depends on it’s local radius of curvature. This may be the reason why the equations

of motion are singular for forward winding, as observed in this research and reported by

Kong[12]. We are currently reviewing both textiles and mechanics (elastica) literature to try

to gain insights in to this question.

**3.4 Modeling of Friction Between Fibers During Yarn Unwinding
**

Team members now hypthosize that the traditional Amonton’s law for friction is too sim-

plistic to capture the physics of this problem. In response to this, we have begun a literature

survey of more-detailed models for friction. One of the more interesting approaches was due

to Qiu et al. [15], who looked at friction between yarn already on the package. In this NTC-

sponsored work, the authors used theory of the dynamic behavior of polymeric materials[16]

and determined that signiﬁcant factors twist of the ﬁber, frequency of loading, gage length,

material properties, and initial orientation of ﬁbres on the package. The model was based

on measuring frictional energy loss of a ﬁber bundle subjected to dynamic loading. On the

basis of Murayama‘s model[16], parameters representing a bond strength and loss tangent

are introduced. Mogazhy’s approach[17] to frictional behavior of cotton ﬁbers focuses mainly

on number of contacting ﬁbers and the sliding length. The friction proﬁle, which results from

the relationship between frictional force and sliding distance, is used to determine frictional

force to a certain ﬁber intensity. A mathematical model is developed for the friction force

based on the experimental results. As part of our ongoing work, we would seek to incorporate

a better representation of friction in the model.

References

[1] M. Hannah. Applications of a theory of the spinning balloon. Journal of the Textile

Institute, 43:T519–T535, 1952.

**National Textile Center Annual Report: November 2002
**

NTC Project: F01-CL04 (formerly F01-C04)

10

**[2] C. Mack. Theoretical study of ring and cap spinning balloon curves (with and without
**

air drag). Journal of the Textile Institute, 44:438, 1953.

[3] D. G. Padﬁeld. The motion and tension of an unwinding thread, I. Proc. Royal Society

of London, A245:382–407, 1958.

[4] H. V. Booth. Variations in tension of an unwinding thread. Br. J. Applied Physics,

8:142–144, 1957.

[5] D. G. Padﬁeld. A note on friction between yarn and package. Journal of the Textile

Institute, 46:T71–T77, 1955.

[6] W. B. Fraser, T. K. Ghosh, and S. K. Batra. On unwinding yarn from a cylindrical

package. Journal of Engineering Mathematics, 40(1):479–498, 1992.

[7] W. B. Fraser. On the eﬀect of yarn elasticity on an unwinding balloon. Journal of the

Textile Institute, 83:603–613, 1992.

[8] R. Wu. Measurement of yarn/package friction and residual tension in over-end unwind-

ing. Master’s thesis, Mechanical Engineering, Clemson University, December 1998.

[9] X. M. Kong, C. D. Rahn, and B. C. Goswami. Steady-state unwinding of yarn from

cylindrical packages. Textile Research Journal, 69:292–306, 1999.

[10] R. Wu, J. Yu, C. D. Rahn, and B. C. Goswami. Measuring yarn/package friction during

over-end unwinding. Textile Research Journal, 70(4):321–327, 2000.

[11] J. D. Clark, W. B. Fraser, and D. M. Stump. Modeling of tension in yarn package

unwinding. Proc. Royal Society of London, A436:59–75, 2001.

[12] X. Kong. Steady State Unwinding of Yarn from Cylindrical Packages: Theory and

Experiment. PhD thesis, Textile and Polymer Science, Clemson University, December

1997.

[13] S. R. Ramaswami. Study of staple yarn-package friction during unwinding. Master’s

thesis, Clemson University, December 2002.

[14] A. E. de Barr and H. Catling. The principles and theory of ring spinning. In F. Charnley

and P. V. Harrison, editors, Manual of cotton spinning, volume 5. Butterworths Press,

Manchester and London, 1965.

[15] Y. Qiu, Y. Wang, and J. Z. Mi. A novel approach for measurement

of ﬁber-on-ﬁber friction. NTC Project Number F98S-09, Year 8 proposal.

www.ntcresearch.org/current/year8/F98-S09.htm.

[16] T. Murayama. Dynamic Mechanical Analysis of Polymeric Material. Elsevier Scientiﬁc

Publishing Company, New York, 1978.

[17] Y. E. El Mogahzy and R. M. Broughton. A new approach for evaluating the frictional

behavior of cotton ﬁbers, part I: fundamental aspects and measuring techniques. Textile

Research Journal, 63(8):465–475, 1993.

National Textile Center Annual Report: November 2002

- 10.pdfUploaded byFakhri Yandri
- As 60068.2.70-2003 Environmental Testing Tests - Test Xb- Abrasion of Markings and Letterings Caused by RubbiUploaded bySAI Global - APAC
- 76743855 Material Science Effect of Different Lubrication Types on Coefficient of FrictiionUploaded byJitu Jena
- Dynamics_ Solved ExercisesUploaded byJoanna Panayi
- 1617 Level M Applied Math Exam Related Materials T2 Wk6Uploaded byAndrew
- Statics NoteUploaded byMei Guan
- evidence of assessment - mfbwuUploaded byapi-359354696
- FrictionUploaded byHafiezul Hassan
- Ext 12003Uploaded bykelvinyeoh
- EXIT-EXAM-2nd-Qtr-2010-11-set-A.docUploaded byAaron Marquez
- 160Class VIII - (U-III) Assignment Eng-Math-S St-Science 2015-16Uploaded bySameem Husain
- Class Dropper Diwali Assignment PhysicsUploaded byKashish Jain
- PhyUploaded bySarvagya Mishra
- Tree ClimberUploaded bySwapnil Rathod
- Chapter 2 Force and Motion STUDENTS MODULEUploaded bySyaza Izzaty
- LEC 03 (Curveliniear 051Uploaded byTommyVercetti
- Aqa Mm1a w w Qp Jun09Uploaded byMohamed Fouad Korra
- Reinforced Earth StructuresUploaded byRohit Chaurasia
- ict rubricUploaded byapi-409698881
- plane.docxUploaded byAngelou Galabo
- 4ff2d5cbe4b03c0c488b34ec Naveenbabbar 1341325783166 FrictionUploaded byDarshan Kumar
- Solution+Test+FyANVC09++Ch+3,+4,+8 4,+9 2 5,+10!1!6+Vectors,+Newton's+Laws,+Torque,+PressureUploaded byEpic Win
- AQA-MM1A-W-W-QP-JUN09Uploaded byÖzgür Oz Yilmaz Mehmet
- Chap 02Uploaded byMahmoud Wahsh
- G0143_02Uploaded bywellbeingempire
- Calculation PIle Capacity1Uploaded bygchakro
- fsr_05ewUploaded byAnrol Sarah Canare
- Effect of Fiber Properties on Yarn Hairiness in Ring Spun YarnUploaded byMohammed Atiqul Hoque Chowdhury
- Silo pressure prediction.pdfUploaded byLuis Hoyos Avalos
- The Static Stability Factor a Dynamic Introduction to EngineeringUploaded byalexrodriguezabc

- yangUploaded byapi-3733260
- warwickerUploaded byapi-3733260
- wangUploaded byapi-3733260
- weiUploaded byapi-3733260
- YESIMUploaded byapi-3733260
- Anne_Hooper_s_Kama_Sutra._Classic_Lovemaking_techniques_reinterpeted_for_today_s_loversUploaded byapi-3733260
- wortmannUploaded byapi-3733260
- zeronianUploaded byapi-3733260
- yearsUploaded byapi-3733260
- yannasUploaded byapi-3733260
- WOOLUploaded byapi-3733260
- wortUploaded byapi-3733260
- whiteUploaded byapi-3733260
- yeoUploaded byapi-3733260
- WETTONUploaded byapi-3733260
- vijayanUploaded byapi-3733260
- stressUploaded byapi-3733260
- ugbolueUploaded byapi-3733260
- VSUBRAMUploaded byapi-3733260
- tsurUploaded byapi-3733260
- stearneUploaded byapi-3733260
- treloarUploaded byapi-3733260
- tereneUploaded byapi-3733260
- vershUploaded byapi-3733260
- stattonUploaded byapi-3733260
- strUploaded byapi-3733260
- ULLMANUploaded byapi-3733260
- t6Uploaded byapi-3733260
- vinisUploaded byapi-3733260
- taborUploaded byapi-3733260