International Journal of Advanced Research in Engineering and Technology (IJARET)

Volume 9, Issue 2, March – April 2018, pp. 58–67, Article ID: IJARET_09_02_008
Available online at http://iaeme.com/Home/issue/IJARET?Volume=9&Issue=2
ISSN Print: 0976-6480 and ISSN Online: 0976-6499
© IAEME Publication

CONSTRAINED BENDING PHENOMENON OF A

SINGLE LAYERED CABLE ASSEMBLY
Rajesh Kumar P
Assistant Professor, Mechanical Engineering Department,
MVJ College of Engineering, Bangalore-67

Parthasarathy N.S
Professor, Mechanical Engineering Department,
Christ (Deemed to be University), Bangalore-29

ABSTRACT
The stiffness response relations of a helical cable assembly have been formulated,
when the cable wraps around a pulley/sheave. The constrained bending phenomenon
of such a cable has been investigated, by considering all the forces and moments
relations of the helical wire, while the hitherto researchers had partially accounted
them or had neglected a few terms. A numerical study has been carried out for a single
layered galvanized steel cable, over a steel pulley. A single wire contact mode has been
assumed and the stiffness elements of the cable are evaluated and compared with the
existing literature.
Cite this Article: Rajesh Kumar P and Parthasarathy N.S, Constrained Bending
Phenomenon of A Single Layered Cable Assembly. International Journal of Advanced
Research in Engineering and Technology, 9(2), 2018, pp 58–67.
http://iaeme.com/Home/issue/IJARET?Volume=9&Issue=2

1. INTRODUCTION
Over the years many types of stranded cables have been designed and tested for various
applications, where a tensile load has to be transmitted by a flexible member. Apart from the
axial response, the bending response becomes vital when the cable passes over a sheave/pulley
and is imposed with a transverse loading arising due to its contact with the cable. Theoretical
analysis of such a constrained stranded cable is inherently rather complex. The analysis of the
cable running over a sheave/pulley has been studied by different authors over a period of time
and a few significant works are reviewed as under. Philips & Costello (1985) formulated an
analytical model to study the associated forces in the individual wires of the helical strand. The
model was constructed for sheave bending case but neglected the shear force in the bi-normal
direction. LeClair and Costello (1988) had given an improved treatment to the wire centreline
which had taken the shape of the deformed helix. Hobbs and Nabijou (1995) studied the
bending strain in the wires of frictionless ropes, by accounting the change in curvature in single
and double helices, when the rope is bent into circular arc and derived it from the first
principles. The bending strains were observed to be more in the innermost layer in contact with
the strand than the outer layer. Ridge M L (2000) investigated the variations in cyclic bending

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJARET 58 editor@iaeme.com
 Rajesh Kumar P and Parthasarathy N.S

strain, for the stranded cable over the pulley, using electrical resistance strain gauges but with
no analytical support. Usabiaga (2006) formulated a new mathematical model considering the
classical Coulomb friction law and employed an iterative procedure to solve the analytical
model. The theory seemed to be efficient and reliable in most of the cases, but causes errors
when the diameter of the sheave becomes very small. Gopinath D et al (2012) have studied
the stiffness response of a cable over the flat drum considering the effects due to tension, torsion
and bending. While establishing the stiffness for the helical wire in contact with the drum it
was noticed that the author probably omitted certain parameters, and hence a refined treatment
is required. Ya fei Lu etal (2015) developed an analytical method to predict the precise cable
drive as a function of bending rigidity. Though it was discussed in detail as an alternative to
various existing transmission capability, the author concluded that further research is needed
on the evaluation of cable stiffness parameters. Yunapei C etal (2016) established a
mathematical model to study the inter-wire phenomenon of the strand subjected to cyclic
bending load and concluded that the wear indent takes place in the normal direction of the
contacting wires having zero slippage. But when the cables are subjected to cyclic bending, the
contribution in the bi-normal direction had been neglected. The above literature survey in the
constrained bending phenomenon indicates that the estimation of stiffness of the cable
assembly has not been done with all the wire forces and moments in the normal, bi-normal and
axial directions. Though omission of one or two parameters have not significantly affected the
overall results of the cable, consideration of all the parameters become vital to predict the local
wire behavior well. Hence this paper addresses to estimate the stiffness of the cable on the
sheave with all the parameters of wire forces and moments mentioned above. Further it
considers the wire stretch on the changes in the curvature and twist relations. Though the works
of Gopinath (2012) have studied these considerations, it is observed that some terms got
omitted in the derivation by the author, probably due to oversight. Hence this paper predicts
the stiffness of a cable assembly over a sheave, in a holistic way, setting right the terms omitted
by Gopinath (2012). The difference in results are analysed for a single layered cable assembly,
with a central core.

2. BASIC MEHCANICS RELATIONS OF A BENT WIRE

The deformed conditions of a strand with six helical wires and a central straight core can be
obtained from the developed geometry of a single deformed helical wire as shown in the Fig 1
below.

Figure 1 Wire geometry

Fig 1(a) shows the axial loading of a strand and Fig 1(b) shows the developed geometry of the helical
wire in a layer
The change in helix angle and change in length of the wire can be obtained from Fig 1(b)
as,
          (01)
         (02)

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJARET 59 editor@iaeme.com
 Constrained Bending Phenomenon of A Single Layered Cable Assembly

where ‘h’ is the strand length, and l & r, are the wire length and helix radius, and α & ,
are the helix angle and the swept angle of the helical wire.
During the axial loading, the strand undergoes an axial strain () and rotational strain (
as a result of which, the axial strain in the wire can be expressed as
          (03)
where
 
  !
 "#  (04)
When the strand is additionally bent, the axial strain in the wire can be computed by
superimposing the axial and bending results. Fig 2 shows the geometry of the strand under free
bending, with a constant radius ρ

Figure 2 Geometry of bent strand

The wire axial strain $% per unit length of a wire at a position angle & can then be expressed
as
- .*/ 0 12. 3
'()*+*, 
4
(05)
Under the combination of axial and pure bending, the net axial strain of the wire ('  can
be expressed by adding equation (03) and (05)
 - .* / 0 12. 3
'  '         
! 4
(06)
The change in curvatures and twist expressions of the helical wire subjected to combination
of axial deflection and bending of the strand can be obtained as
.* 07812. / 0 .* 9
56 
4
(07)

; .*/ 0 12./ 0  .*= 0 12. 9

56:      <    
- ! 4
(08)

.* 0 12.? 0  .*? 0 12. 012. 9

5>  -
  @  !
 4
(09)
It can be noted that these relations are due to the refinements that took into account the wire
stretch effect, as an additional contributory parameter. This feature though introduced in axial
case, is accounted fully in bending now.
The resulting forces and couples in the helical wire for the bent strand can be obtained from
the following mechanics relations.
A  BCD E (10)
F  BG56 (11)

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJARET 60 editor@iaeme.com
 Rajesh Kumar P and Parthasarathy N.S

FH  BG56H (12)
I  JK5> (13)
where T is the axial force & G, G’ are the bending moment in the normal and bi-normal
directions & H is the twisting moment in the axial direction of the wire respectively. The axial,
bending (flexural) & torsional stiffness of the wire are EA, EI & CJ respectively.

WIRE EQUILIBRIUM EQUATIONS

The equilibrium equations for the helical wire in the normal, bi-normal and axial directions are
given by
+L
 MH>  A6H  N  O
+.
(14)
+L:
+.
 A6  M>  P  O (15)
+Q
 M6H  MH6  R  O
+.
(16)
+S
+.
 FH>  I6H  MH  T  O (17)
US:
 IT  FW  M  TH  O
UV
(18)
UX
 FTH  FHT  Y  O
UV
(19)
where N, N’ are the shear forces in the normal and bi-normal directions of the wire and 6,
6H & > are the curvatures and twist of the helical wire at any instant. The components of the
distributed forces per unit length of the wire are X, Y, Z and the components of distributed
moments acting per length of the wire are K, K', Θ in the normal, bi-normal and axial directions
respectively.
Using the equilibrium equations from (14) to (19) the shear forces in the normal and bi-
normal directions are given by
N=-G> (20)
MH  I6H  FH> (21)
The above relations express the state of the wire in a free bending mode

3. CABLE BENDING OVER A SHEAVE/PULLEY

When the cable is bent over a sheave/pulley, that portion of the wire in contact with the pulley
receives additional forces p & q in the normal and bi-normal directions of the wire, which can
be duly accounted with the fictional effects at the contacting wire and pulley interface.

Figure 3 Wire in contact with the sheave

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJARET 61 editor@iaeme.com
 Constrained Bending Phenomenon of A Single Layered Cable Assembly

Fig 3 shows a contacting wire (bottom wire) with the pulley surface and the corresponding
forces p & q introduced by the pulley on it. The position angle of the contact wire at this instant
is &  <ZO[ as per the angular notations shown in Fig 3. While the wire that makes contact
with the pulley will be treated with constrained bending relations, the remaining wires in the
outer layer will be treated with the relations shown for free bending.
As a result of the constrained bending of the contacting wire (at position angle &  <ZO[ )
with the sheave, the axial and bi-normal forces in the wire are modified as under
 \]- .*/ 0 12. 9
A7-)  'BC     BC       ^_`
! 4
(22)

MH7-)  I6aH  FH>a  b (23)

4. CABLE EQUILIBRIUM EQUATIONS

Resolving the wire forces and moments along the cable axis,
The axial force, twisting moment and bending moment of the cable are given as under
c  B 1C 1  d  <  A    MH     A7-)    MH7-)   (24)
ef  F 1 K 1  d  <I    F:    A    MH    I    FH   
A7-)     MH7-)    (25)
e(  B 1 G1  d  <  A    MH    9  F  9  FH    9  I    9 
M "    9    A7-)    MH7-)    9  F  9  FH    9  I    9 
M "    9  (26)
where m is number of wires in the outer layer
The above expressions are accounted with the contribution of the core parameters, having
the suffix ‘c’.

5. CABLE STIFFNESS RELATIONS

The equilibrium Eqns (24) to (26) mentioned above can be expressed in matrix form as under
hi opp opq opr $
g jk m  n oqp oqq orq s gtv um
orr <vw
(27)
jl orp orq
where ', v and <v` are the strand axial strain, rotation per unit length and curvature
respectively. T , T ff and T (( are effective strand axial stiffness, strand torsional rigidity and
flexural rigidity. Tf and Tf  are the tension-torsion, T( and T ( are the tension-bending. T(f
and Tf( are the torsion bending coupling parameters, respectively. The stiffness parameters in
the above equation are shown in the Appendix in Part A for free bending and in Part B for
constrained bending.

6. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS:

The cable stiffness parameters mentioned in the previous section and in the Appendix are
numerically evaluated for a single layered galvanized strand assembly with a straight central
core whose specifications are shown in Table 1

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJARET 62 editor@iaeme.com
 Rajesh Kumar P and Parthasarathy N.S

Table 1 Specifications of galvanized strand

Parameters Symbols Values
Number of helical wires m 6
Radius of core Rc 3.2mm
Radius of helical wire Rw 3.15mm
Helix angle α 83º
Young’s modulus for core and wire E c & Ew 210000N/mm2
Poisson’s ratio x 0.5

yz ;%
Coefficient of friction
0.5
between sheave-wire
Radius of curvature of the strand w 120mm
Position angle of helical wires in the strand ɸ 0º - 360º
The numerical values of the stiffness parameters are computed as per the equations of
LeClair & Costello (1988), who have adopted the basic mechanics relations and whose model
has been used as a reference in many research works. The resulting values are tabulated in the
2nd column of the Table 2. It can be noted that LeClair & Costello model has defined the
phenomenon of free bending of the cable without contact with the pulley. Since the present
paper has refined the normally used wire curvature and twist relations with inclusion of wire
stretch, the corresponding stiffness parameters are evaluated and tabulated in column 3 of
Table 2, for the free bending mode. Though the overall individual stiffness values between
LeClair & Costello and the present model, in free bending mode, do not significantly change,
consideration of the refinement with the wire stretch effect, has yielded significant change in
the wire twist and bending components that made up the total stiffness value. As a sample
explanation, the breakup of the bending stiffness coefficient (T( , T (f & T (() for the bottom
wire (wire no 4 at position angle &  <ZO[ ) is shown in Table 3, for the LeClair & Costello
and present model with the wire stretch effect. It can be observed that consideration of wire
stretch effect, has significantly changed the twist and bending component of the bending
stiffness coefficient for the wire no 4, while axial component remains unaltered. Though this
may not affect the overall wire axial elongation due to the predominant effect of axial
component, its local twisting moment and bending moment are altered, thereby contributing
for exact evaluation of local effects, like slip initiation, growth etc.
Computations are also made for evaluating the stiffness coefficients of the galvanized cable
( shown in Table 1), when it is passed over pulley, thereby making contact with the wire, and
contributing to the constrained bending phenomenon, as per the formulations made in this
paper in Section 3. The stiffness coefficients are evaluated using the theoretical relations shown
in Appendix. The relations shown in Part A are used for the wires that are not in contact with
the pulley and that shown in Part B are used for the wires that make contact with the pulley.
The stiffness coefficients are evaluated for the cable at an instant as shown in Fig 3, where
the bottom wire no 4 at position angle &  <ZO[, makes contact with the pulley thereby
undergoing constrained bending and the other wires are free from contact with the pulley,
undergoing free bending phenomenon and are tabulated in the 5th column of the Table 2.
It can be noted that formulations of the constrained bending case mentioned in this paper
have accounted all the terms for the contacting wire, as presented in Appendix Part B, while
the formulations used by Gopinath (2012), have considered them partially. The respective
stiffness coefficient of the contacting wire (wire no 4) for Gopinath model can be obtained
from Appendix Part B, as T@  C ; T f@  { ; T(@  | ; Tf@  } ; Tff@  B ; T (f@  c ;
when ~   <, in A, B, C, D, E, F & D, E, F are multiplied by `.

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJARET 63 editor@iaeme.com
 Constrained Bending Phenomenon of A Single Layered Cable Assembly

Table 2 Comparisons of cable stiffness coefficient for free bending and constrained bending

Free bending model Constrained bending model

Stiffness coefficient LeClair and Gopinath model
Present model Present model
Costello (1988) (2012)
6 M 112,90,432 112,90,462 128,57,944 128,68,563

6 f M  dd 37,38,826 37,38,814 43.48,904 43,54,344

6 ( M  dd 0 0 -49,70,977 -50,06,199

6 f M  dd 35,60,117 37,38,814 43,48,752 43,33,424

6 ff  M  dd  66,66,235 70,89,637 73,29,824 73,08,243

6f(   M  dd  0 0 -19,26,609 -18,83,064

6 ( M  dd 0 0 -49,72,345 -50,10,567

6(f M  dd  0 0 -19,35,518 -19,54,307

6 ((M  dd  608,98,541 609,00,246 648,10,948 757,14,018

The stiffness coefficients for the cable in Table 1 are evaluated as per Gopinath
formulations and are presented in column 4 of Table 2, to compare the results in column 5 with
that of the present model, where the formulations are complete with all the terms. Though the
overall results of the present model and that of Gopinath model seem to be closer as in column
5 and 6, a significant increase of 14% in bending stiffness is noticed in the present model,
justifying the exact derivations made in this paper.
The increase in the bending stiffness coefficient of the present constrained bending model
is justified with the breakup of individual components of axial, twisting & bending of the
contacting wire as shown in Table 3. It can be observed that the axial component of the bending
stiffness of the contacting wire has a significant increase, due to its contact with the pulley.
The variation of the bending stiffness of the contacting wire has been studied as a function
of the spatial locations of the wire on the pulley (pitch length) for the present model and
Gopinath model and have been plotted in Fig 4. It can be observed that the present model yields
a higher bending stiffness than that of Gopinath model, as it has accounted all the terms during
the formulation process, justifying the refinement made in this study.

Table 3 Break up of stiffness coefficient for wire 4(at position angle  •€•[ ) for free bending and
constrained bending models
Bending-Tension (N-mm), Bending-Torsion (N-mm2), Bending-Bending (N-mm2),
Model component component component
Axial Twist Bending Axial Twist Bending Axial Twist Bending
LCM -5080730 3464 9146 -1980676 89596 -241643 16131318 11337 977653
PFBM -5080730 53 4573 -1980676 90967 -238298` 16131318 11169 963133
PCBM -101,56,156 49 4,505 -39,33,986 -94,696 -2,34,947 320,36,537 10,711 9,49,586
LCM: LeClair & Costello Model, PFBM: Present Free Bending Model, PCBM: Present
Constrained Bending Model.

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJARET 64 editor@iaeme.com
 Rajesh Kumar P and Parthasarathy N.S

Present constrained model Gopinath model

2.E+07
2.E+07
Bending Stiffness N-mm2

2.E+07
1.E+07
1.E+07
1.E+07
8.E+06
6.E+06
4.E+06
2.E+06
0.E+00
0 50 100 150 200
Pitch Lenght mm

Figure 4 Bending stiffness of the contacting wire vs pitch length

7. CONCLUSIONS
The stiffness response of a single layered cable with six helical wires around a central straight
core has been studied over a sheave. A refined mathematical model has been developed to
analyse the contact effects of the sheave over the helical wire, and the analytical expressions
are established assuming a single wire contact with the sheave. The present model has been
analysed under two different cases of free and constrained bending, and the results are
compared with that of LeClair & Costello (for free bending) and with that of Gopinath model
(for constrained bending) justifying the improvised formulations.

REFERENCE
(1) Gopinath D et al “Theoretical estimation of stiffness of stranded cable subjected to constrained
bending” International Journal of Offshore and Polar Engineering,2012, Vol 22 No 4,330-336.
(2) Hobbs.R.E and Nabijou.S “Changes in wire curvature as a wire rope is bent over a sheave”
Journal of Strain Analysis, 1995, vol 30, No 271-281.
(3) LeClair R.A and Costello G.A., “Axial bending and torsional loading of a strand with friction”
Journal of offshore mechanics and Artic engg, 1988 Vol. 110 No 38-42.
(4) Philips J.W & Costello G.A., “Analysis of wire ropes with internal-wire rope cores” Journal
of Applied Mechanics, 1985, Vol 52, No 510-516.
(5) Ridge I M L, Zheng J and Chaplin C R, “Measurement of cyclic bending strain in steel wire
rope” Journal of Strain Analysis, 2000, Vol 35(6), No 545-558.
(6) Usabiaga H, Ezkurra M, Madoz M and Pagalday J., “Mechanical interaction between wire
rope and sheaves”Oipeec Conference 2006, Trends for rope, Athens Greece(2006), No 157-
166.
(7) Ya fei Lu, Da-peng Fan, Hua Liu, Mo Hei “ Transmission capability of precise cable drive
including bending rigidity” Journal of Mechanism and Machine Theory, 2015, Vol 94, No 132-
140.

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJARET 65 editor@iaeme.com
 Constrained Bending Phenomenon of A Single Layered Cable Assembly

(8) Yuanpei C, Fanming M and Xiansheng G “Interwire wear and its influence on contact
behaviour of wire rope strand subjected to cyclic bending load” Wear, 2016, 368-369, No 470-
484.

APPENDIX
Part A
Stiffness coefficients for the non-contacting case
•Ž ˆ‰Š Œ ••ˆ‘ Œ8†’ ˆ‰Š ‹ Œ ••ˆ“ Œ 
‚ƒƒ  „ …†‡ ˆ‰Š‹ Œ  – †•‡ •
”•

•Ž ˆ‰Š “ Œ ••ˆ‹ Œ;†’ ˆ‰Š • Œ ••ˆ‹ Œ•8ˆ‰Š• Œ 

‚ƒ—  „†‡” ˆ‰Š • Œ ••ˆ Œ  
”

ˆ‰Š‹ Œ ••ˆ“ Œ ••ˆ 9 ˆ‰Š™ Œ ••ˆ• Œ ••ˆ 9

‚ƒ˜  †‡” ˆ‰Š‹ Œ ••ˆ 9  •Ž ”
 †’ ”

†’ ˆ‰Š• Œ ••ˆ‹ Œ •Ž ˆ‰Š • Œ ••ˆ™ Œ †’ ˆ‰Š “ Œ ••ˆ‹ Œ

‚—ƒ  „•Ž ˆ‰Š• Œ ••ˆ‹ Œ  †‡” ˆ‰Š• Œ ••ˆ Œ  ”
 ”
 ”


‚——  „•Ž ˆ‰Š ™ Œ  †’ ˆ‰Š Œ ••ˆ• Œ š•  ˆ‰Š• Œ›  †‡” • ˆ‰Š Œ ••ˆ• Œ  •Ž ˆ‰Š™ Œ ••ˆ• Œ 
†’ ˆ‰Š‹ Œ ••ˆ• Œ š•  ˆ‰Š • Œ›  œ•Ž •

‚—˜  •Ž” ˆ‰Š“ Œ ••ˆ Œ ••ˆ 9  †’ ˆ‰Š“ Œ ••ˆ Œ ••ˆ 9  †‡”• ˆ‰Š• Œ ••ˆ Œ ••ˆ 9 
•Ž ˆ‰Š“ Œ ••ˆ‹ Œ ••ˆ 9  †’ ˆ‰Š‘ Œ ••ˆ Œ ••ˆ 9
•Ž ˆ‰Š Œ ••ˆ‘ Œ ••ˆ 9 †’ ˆ‰Š‹ Œ ••ˆ“ Œ ••ˆ 9 †’ ˆ‰Š ‹ Œ ••ˆ• Œ ••ˆ 9
‚˜ƒ  †‡” ˆ‰Š‹ Œ ••ˆ 9    
” ” ”
•Ž ˆ‰Š Œ ••ˆ“ Œ ••ˆ 9

”

‚˜—  †‡” • ˆ‰Š• Œ ••ˆ Œ ••ˆ 9  •Ž ˆ‰Š“ Œ ••ˆ‹ Œ ••ˆ 9  †’ ˆ‰Š• Œ ••ˆ‹ Œ š•  ˆ‰Š• Œ› ••ˆ 9 
†’ ˆ‰Š• Œ ••ˆ Œ š•  ˆ‰Š• Œ› ••ˆ 9  •Ž ˆ‰Š“ Œ ••ˆ 9

‚—˜  †‡” • ˆ‰Š‹ Œ ••ˆ• 9  ”•Ž ˆ‰Š‹ Œ ••ˆ“ Œ ••ˆ• 9  ”†’ ˆ‰Š™ Œ ••ˆ• Œ ••ˆ• 9 
†’ ˆ‰Š Œ š•  ••ˆ• Œ› ˆ‰Š • 9  †’ ˆ‰Š ™ Œ ••ˆ• 9  •Ž ˆ‰Š ‹ Œ ••ˆ• Œ ••ˆ• 9  †’ ˆ‰Š Œ ••ˆ• Œ š• 
••ˆ• Œ› ˆ‰Š • 9)†•’ •

Part B
Stiffness Coefficients of the bottom contact wire at position angle 9  <ZO
‚ƒƒ“  ‚ ƒƒ  ‡• ˆ ˆ‰Š Œ  ž ••ˆ Œ
‚ƒ—“  ‚ ƒ—  Ÿ• ˆ ˆ‰Š Œ  † ••ˆ Œ
‚ƒ˜“  ‚ ƒ˜  |• ˆ ˆ‰Š Œ  ••ˆ Œ
‚—ƒ“  ‚ —ƒ  ‡• ˆ ” ••ˆ Œ  ž” ˆ‰Š Œ
‚——“  ‚ ——  Ÿ•ˆ” ••ˆ Œ  †” ˆ‰Š Œ

‚—˜“  ‚ —˜  |• ˆ” ••ˆ Œ  ” ˆ‰Š Œ

‚˜ƒ“  ‚ ˜ƒ  ‡•ˆ ” ˆ‰Š Œ ••ˆ ¡  ž” ••ˆ Œ ••ˆ ¢
‚˜—“  ‚ ˜—  Ÿ•ˆ ” ˆ‰Š Œ ••ˆ ¡  †” ••ˆ Œ ••ˆ ¢

‚˜˜“  ‚ ˜˜  |• ˆ ” ˆ‰Š Œ ••ˆ ¡  ” ••ˆ Œ ••ˆ ¢

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJARET 66 editor@iaeme.com
 Rajesh Kumar P and Parthasarathy N.S

” ˆ‰Š Œ ••ˆ Œ
‚ ƒƒ…£E 8 ¤ –8‚ —ƒ ¤
‡ ” ˆ‰Š Œ • ˆ ” ••ˆ• Œ
•;•ˆ ˆ‰Š Œ…£E 8 –;
¤ ¤

” ˆ‰Š Œ ••ˆ Œ
‚ƒ— …£E 8 –8‚ ——
Ÿ ¤ ¤
” ˆ‰Š Œ • ˆ ” ••ˆ• Œ
•;•ˆ ˆ‰Š Œ…£E 8 –;
¤ ¤

” ˆ‰Š Œ ••ˆ Œ
‚ƒ˜ …£E 8 –8‚—˜
| ¤
” ˆ‰Š Œ
¤
•ˆ ” ••ˆ•Œ
•;• ˆ ˆ‰Š Œ …£ E 8 –;
¤ ¤

‚ —ƒ8‡• ˆ ” ••ˆ Œ
ž ” ˆ‰Š Œ
¤…£ E8 –
¤

‚ —— 8Ÿ• ˆ” ••ˆ Œ
† ” ˆ‰Š Œ
¤…£ E8 –
¤

‚ —˜ 8|•ˆ” ••ˆ Œ
 ” ˆ‰Š Œ
¤…£ E8 –
¤

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJARET 67 editor@iaeme.com