Effect of Groove Shape on the

Frictional Hold of a Sheave on

C. S. Albro
Battelle-Columbus,
Polyester Rope
Columbus, Ohio 43201 This paper discusses the effects of sheave groove shape, sheave diameter, and line
tension on the frictional hold of polyester rope. A series of tests were conducted
F. Liu using five different sheaves, 5 and 9.2-cm-dia 2-in-l polyester rope, under both wet
and dry conditions. The frictional hold was determined from the difference in rope
Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory,
PortHueneme, Calif. 93043
tension on opposite sides of a rotating sheave. The maximum tension on the high
side was 245 kN. It was found that the coefficient of friction between polyester rope
and smooth steel sheaves decreases with increase in rope tension for a given rope
size. The 70-deg- V groove sheave shape demonstrated approximately 25 percent
more frictional hold than the U-groove sheave shape. Holding capacity increases
with sheave diameter. Large relative velocity exists between elastic lift line and
sheave surface. Data will be used in a traction winch design.

Introduction
The U.S. Navy Supervisor of Salvage is frequently called
upon to recover large objects - such as weapons, aircraft, and
vessels - from the ocean all over the world. Because of such
frequent calls, a Flyaway Deep Ocean Salvage System
(FADOSS) is being developed at the Naval Civil Engineering
Laboratory (NCEL). Basically, the FADOSS will be a
motion-compensated lift system, capable of recovering and
deploying a 245-kN payload (submerged weight) in water
depths to 3048 m. The major component of the FADOSS will
be a soft-line traction winch. The lift line will be a flexible,
lightweight, 28-cm-circumference polyester rope, which can
be easily attached to the payload by either divers or sub-
mersibles.
Background
In designing a soft-line traction winch, the general in-
dustrial practice is to follow the same approach as in
designing a wire-rope traction winch. This approach involves
applying the simple formula used in the design of conveyor
belts:
Th = Txe»" (1)
where
TH = high tension, or pulling tension
Tt = low tension, or back tension
A* = coefficient of friction between line and sheave
a = angle in radian enclosed by the two ends of the line.
Contributed by the Ocean Engineering Division and presented at the 3rd In-
ternational Symposium on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, ETCE,
New Orleans, Louisiana, February 12-16, 1984, of THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF
MECHANICAL ENGINEERS. Manuscript received by the Ocean Engineering Divi-
sion, August 9, 1983; revised manuscript received October 14, 1983.
The coefficient of friction (/i), obtained from a handbook, is
usually based on the friction measured between two solid
blocks. This value is assumed to be constant and to be in-
dependent of the contact pressure between the blocks.
This approach has resulted in the production of satisfactory
wire-rope traction winches. However, during the past few
years, several of the Navy's soft-line traction winches have
developed line-slipping problems. This slippage causes ac-
celerated line wear and varying line tension. These problems
suggest that a more-accurate means of determining the
coefficient of friction of the lift line over the sheave is needed
in winch-drum design.
Little data on polyester rope friction are to be found in the
literature. Therefore, we are carrying out a laboratory
program to generate friction data that will be directly ap-
plicable to the design of sheaves for synthetic rope traction
winches. The program is designed to study the effects of
selected design and operational variables on the coefficient of
friction. At present, these variables are: the ratio of line
diameter to sheave diameter, groove configuration, line
tension, and line wetness.
Test Setup
The test setup consists, basically, of wrapping a polyester
rope 180 deg around a driven sheave, with one end of the rope
secured and the other end attached to a pulling cylinder. Load
cells are used to measure the tension in the rope on each side
of the sheave. Figure 1 is a schematic of the test setup. The
maximum allowable load on the upper leg of the test setup is
245 kN. The maximum load capability of the pulling cylinder
is 200 kN. The rotation of the sheave is toward the pulling
cylinder.

Journal of Energy Resources Technology MARCH 1985, Vol. 107/103

Copyright © 1985 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://energyresources.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/23/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
 SYNTHETIC
LINE
STOPPER SHEAVE
DRIVER

LOAD CELL

Fig. 1 Schematic of test setup

Table 1 Summary of tests

Sheave Rope Relative Average coefficient
Run Shape Diameter Diameter Condition velocity off riction
no. (cm) (cm) (cm/s) (111.2kN) (222.4 kN)
1 70-V 61.0 9.2 Wet 32.0 0.14 0.10
2 8.9-U 61.0 9.2 Wet 32.0 0.10 0.09
3 8.9-U 61.0 9.2 Dry 32.0 0.11 0.09
4 70-V 35.6 9.2 Dry 18.5 0.12 0.08
5 70-V 35.6 9.2 Wet 18.5 0.10 0.07
6 70-V 35.6 5.0 Wet 14.7 0.10 —
7 8.9-U 35.6 5.0 Wet 16.5 0.05 —
8 8.9-U 35.6 9.2 Dry 18.5 0.10 0.07
9 8.9-U 35.6 9.2 Wet 18.5 0.10 0.08
10 45-V 35.6 9.2 Dry 18.5 0.12 0.08
11 70-V 61.0 9.2 Dry 3.3 0.20 0.16
12 70-V 61.0 9.2 Wet 3.3 0.23 0.21
13 8.9-U 61.0 9.2 Dry 3.3 0.13 0.10
14 8.9-U 61.0 9.2 Wet 3.3 0.15 0.12

Test Procedure 10 The frictional hold over a range of loads is determined

The following steps describe the procedure for determining
the frictional hold that a sheave has on synthetic rope:
1 At the start of each test series, the strip recorder is set for
a full-scale 222 kN. The calibration is noted on the strip paper
and dated.
2 The selected sheave is placed on the sheave drive shaft.
3 The synthetic rope is threaded through the lower clamp,
around the sheave, and through the upper clamp. If the test is
to be run wet, the segment of rope that passes around the
sheave is presoaked.
4 The bolts on the lower clamp are tightened until the
squeeze on the rope is enough to achieve the desired maximum
load.
5 The rod of the pulling cylinder is fully extended.
6 All slack is removed from the rope, and the bolts are
tightened on the upper clamp until the squeeze on the rope is
enough to achieve the desired maximum load.
7 The pulling cylinder pressure is increased until the lower
load cell reads about 89 kN.
8 With the recorder on, the sheave drive motor is turned
on.
9 After twenty seconds, with the sheave still rotating, the
load is decreased to between 13 and 22 kN.
by slowly increasing the load until the maximum desired load
is achieved on the high side, and then slowly decreasing the
load.
Results
Fourteen tests were conducted using five different sheaves,
two sizes of rope, dry and wet rope, and two different sheave-
rotation rates. Table 1 summarizes the tests and shows the
parameters that were varied. A sample strip chart is presented
in Fig. 2. This chart shows the rope tension on each side of the
sheave.
Three basic sheave shapes were tested: 70-deg included
angle V with 0.97-cm root radius, 8.89-cm-dia U, 45-deg-
included angle V with 2.84-cm root radius. Both ropes were 2-
in-1 braided polyester. The sheave-rotation speed for the first
10 tests was 10 rpm, and 1 rpm for the last four tests.
Rearranging equation (1), the "effective" coefficient of
friction (/x) can be calculated from the rope tension data using
the following formula for a 180-deg wrap:
lx = (\n(Tl,/T,))/ir (2)
The change in "effective" coefficient of friction as a function
of rope tension was determined from both the increasing and
the decreasing load portion of the test. Figure 3 shows the
cyclic effect of load on the friction of the 45-deg V-groove
sheave. This effect is typical of the other tests, which showed

104/Vol. 107, MARCH 1985 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://energyresources.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/23/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 TIME IN SECONDS 60 .25

o
H
h-
O
H
a.
Li.

z
UJ
H
O
H
U.
U-
UJ
O
o

50 100 150 200 250

FIRST LOAD CYCLE
HIGH SIDE TENSION. KN
300. 330 360 . 390 .420 450
IIIIIMIIIIH IHDIHtlilHnmiMlllnllMlnimlltllllM Fig. 3 Calculated results of test no. 10

The data, suggest that, for a given sheave-groove shape, the

coefficient of friction is a function of rope pressure, which is
defined here as the total load on the sheave divided by the
product of sheave-pitch diameter and rope diameter
P -(Th + T{)/(Dp*D,) (4)

SECOND LOAD CYCLE
Fig. 2 Recorded tension of test no. 10
scattered results. Figure 3 also shows that increasing or
decreasing the load affects the frictional hold.
Discussion
When a moving rope starts its wrap around a rotating
sheave, it is moving at a specific speed. The frictional hold the
sheave has on the rope stretches the rope as it goes around the
sheave; thus the rope exits at a different velocity. This exit
velocity (Vh) for a 180-deg wrap can be defined as
iCe^-lA
(3)
"•(' EA
where
E = elastic modulus of the rope
A = cross-sectional area of the rope.
If the sheave is rotating at the same speed as the entrance
velocity, the difference between the two velocities defines the
relative velocity of slip of the rope on the sheave. Applying
equation (3) to a winch that is assumed to have eight 70-deg V
sheaves and to be pulling a load of 254 kN with 9.2-cm-dia 2-
in-1 polyester rope that is moving at a velocity of 10.7 m per
min, the relative velocity of slip of the rope on the highest
loaded sheave surface is about 1.02 cm per s.
In the original test setup, the sheave was rotated at 10 rpm,
which translates into a relative slip velocity of 32 cm per s.
When the test equipment was modified to reduce the sheave
rotational rate to 1 rpm, the result was a relative slip velocity
of 3.2 cm per s. At this lower speed, it is possible to
realistically evaluate a winch operating in the 27.4-m-per-min
range. The reduction in speed also improved the frictional
hold on the rope, as can be seen in Fig. 4(a). The improvement
is most dramatic for the 70-deg V sheave.
where
P = rope pressure
Dp = sheave pitch diameter
Dr = rope diameter
Note that "rope pressure" is not the actual contact pressure
between the rope and the sheave. This quantity will vary,
depending on the location along the sheave. Figure 4(b) shows
the effect of rope pressure on sheave friction for three related
test runs, calculated with equation (4).
After completion of test 11, the low tension leg was loaded
to 67.6 kN and the sheave was rotated for one hour. The
"effective" coefficient of friction decreased from 0.22 at the
start to 0.17 after one hour. The rope at end of testing showed
signs of wear when compared to the start of testing.
Figure 4(c) shows the difference between wet and dry rope.
The wet-rope frictional hold was higher during the decreasing
load portion of the test cycle. As can be seen in Fig. 4(d), the
70-deg V sheave exhibits better frictional hold than does the U
sheave. The 45-deg V sheave is not shown in this figure since
its root radius was so large that it was essentially a U-groove
sheave.
Findings
Our analysis of the test data reveals the following:
1 The coefficient of friction between polyester rope and
smooth steel sheaves decreases as the tension on the rope
increases.
2 For a given rope tension, the frictional hold capability of
a sheave increases with diameter (either rope or sheave)
because the rope pressure on the sheave decreases.
3 The 70-deg V-groove sheave had better frictional hold
than the U-groove sheave.
4 The coefficient of friction decreases as rope wear in-
creases.
5 Decreasing the relative slipping speed increases the
frictional hold of the sheave.

Journal of Energy Resources Technology MARCH 1985, Vol. 107/105

Downloaded From: http://energyresources.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/23/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 CA3 RELATIVE VELOCITY CB!> ROPE PRESSURE

o .25
H
o
H- H
O I-
H O
fX H
U. a:
U.
O

z 2
UJ
UJ H
H O
H
o U.
H U-
UJ UJ
O O
O O

2000 4000 6000 8000 2000 4000 6000 8000

ROPE PRESSURE, KPA ROPE PRESSURE, KPA

C O DRY/WET ROPE CD) GOOVE SHAPE

o o
H
H
I- I-
O o
H H
OC DC
U.
U.
O
U.
O

UJ
H .15 z
O UJ
H H
U. O
U. H
UJ U.
o U.
o UJ
O
o

2000 4000 6000 8000 2000 4000 6000 8000

ROPE PRESSURE, KPA ROPE PRESSURE, KPA
Fig. 4 Comparison of various parameters

6 Wet polyester line seems to have the same coefficient of
friction as a dry polyester line, both tested over a smooth steel
sheave and with increasing rope tension. However, for
decreasing rope tension, the wet line has the greater coef-
ficient of friction.
Conclusions
The following conclusions are based on our tests with a
limited number of ropes and sheaves:
1 Additional tests should be performed to extend the
analyses begun in this investigation to more sizes of rope,
different rope materials, different sheave materials, different
sheave-surface conditions, and different sheave diameters.
The data resulting from these additional tests can be used to
refine the design equations developed in this study.
2 The design of soft-line traction winches should be based
on the contact pressure between the line and the sheave.
3 A realistic coefficient of friction should be selected on the
basis of the operational load condition and the sheave
diameter.

106/Vol. 107, MARCH 1985 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://energyresources.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/23/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use