Vertical Cable, Torque, Force applied to Wheels

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the mechanics of a robotic climber that ascends a cable, focusing on the forces involved, particularly the resistance force due to the curvature of the cable and the implications for motor torque. Participants explore calculations related to friction, torque, and the material properties of the cable.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Experimental/applied

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that the curvature of the cable increases the straightening force, which may make it harder for the motor to operate.
  • Another participant argues that if the belt is not slipping, the resistance is primarily due to the torque required to keep the wheel rotating, rather than friction from the wheels.
  • A different viewpoint indicates that increasing tension on the cable will increase the load on the motor due to added stress on the bearings, but measuring this effect is necessary as it may not be calculable.
  • One participant notes that when the cable is held loosely, the climber moves easily, but pulling on the cable increases resistance, suggesting a complex interaction between tension and movement.
  • There is a question about whether rolling friction plays a role in the climbing mechanism, with one participant suggesting that reducing forces at specific points could alleviate bearing stress.
  • Another participant raises the possibility that the material properties of the cable, specifically its flexibility, could impact the climber's ability to ascend effectively.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the factors affecting the resistance force and motor load, with no consensus reached on the primary causes or the best methods for calculation. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the exact contributions of friction, tension, and cable material properties.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention the need for empirical testing to validate their hypotheses, particularly regarding the effects of cable tension and material flexibility on the climbing mechanism. There are unresolved questions about the calculations for forces at specific points on the cable.

breadvsrice
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I am working on a project at my University. It's extra-curricular and not homework related. At the end we will give a report on what we learned during the development. Our team is working on some ideas for a basic robotic climber, that climbs a cable (similar to a seatbelt).

What we decided to try, was to "offset" the wheels on either side of the cable, and adjust their height for proper grip on the cable.

I was hoping someone would know how to calculate forces like as shown in the pic below?
The best I could find so far, was the capstan equation for calculating friction based on the force applied to the cable, and the number of times it is wrapped around the wheel. Ex: π/6 radians.

What I really want to know, is the "resistance force," or how much harder the motor has to work to turn the wheels based on how "curved" the belt is...
As you can see in the picture, the cable "bends" through the tires. So, when a pulling force is applied to the cable (balloon and anchor) it creates a force that wants to "straighten" the cable. When the cable tries to straighten itself, it applies a force to wheel 1 and 2.

Logic tells me that this force will increase friction, and make it harder for the wheels to rotate. (Also pushes the shaft against the walls of the bearings, etc. slight, but still added friction. I will ignore this for now, and focus only on the wheel-cable part)

1) Am I right in assuming the "curvier" the cable is, the higher the straightening force, and the harder for the motor to work?

2) How can I calculate how much harder the motor has to work? (Ex. No stress = 1Nm to start climbing. With stress = 2Nm needed to start climbing. How do I calculate this?)

Here are the pictures:
https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc1/t1/400596_10202953978913296_150499901_n.jpg
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There is no frictional drag from the wheels at all if the belt is not slipping relative to the wheels - all the resistance comes from whatever torque is required to keep the wheel rotating about its axis (This is why we use belt drives in so many applications). You will, however, get friction in both guides if the moving belt is rubbing against them (which is why when we use belt drives, we prefer to use tensioner and idler pulleys to change the direction).
 
Increasing the tension will increase the load on the motor but only because it increases the load on the bearings. This should be a modest effect if the bearings are any good. You would need to measure how bearing friction varies with bearing load. I don't believe you can calculate it.
 
Thanks for the quick response! This was our original thought, that the rotation was independent of friction as it isn't slipping, but we noticed that when you held the cable loosely, the climber would go up and down easily. But, if you pulled on both ends of the cable with an decent bit of human-only force, you could keep the climber from sliding down do to gravity. It also made it harder for the climber to go up. Our bearings are ball bearings, 8mm diameter, 4mm center hole, 3mm thick. They are very smooth. Each one is about $3 per bearing, so of decent quality. We didn't think the "only" force making it harder to climb was just because of the extra stress on the shaft/bearing...But maybe that is what the problem was.

So, if we decrease the force at points F1 and F2 in the pic above, it should decrease stress on the bearings, reducing friction there...maybe this is all we need to do. Guess we will just have to test a little and see how it goes. So, "rolling friction" doesn't play apart here?

EDIT: Also, how would you go about calculating the F1 and F2 values anyway? By pulling both ends of the cable, you are definitely causing a force to be applied at those points. Is there an equation to use here?
 
Last edited:
What's the cable made of? If it's compressible but not very elastic then rolling resistance could be a factor.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
CWatters said:
What's the cable made of? If it's compressible but not very elastic then rolling resistance could be a factor.

The cable is made of something called "Technora" made by Teijin.
http://www.teijinaramid.com/aramids/technora/

It is moderately flexible, but also kind of stiff. Now that I think about it, the climber might not be able to climb because the cable itself can't "bend" fast enough to make that "S" shape with the wheels...if this is the case, maybe a more flexible cable would work better, or designing the climber so it doesn't need the cable to "bend" or "flex" as much?

Thanks for the insight! Interesting thoughts...
 

Similar threads

Undergrad [Question] Calculating the force generated by a tarp hung between two walls
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Undergrad Opposing force of the axle when a torque is applied to a wheel?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Undergrad How Does Changing Mass and Spring Force Affect Watch Oscillators?
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Undergrad Understanding Net Internal Torque and Kinetic Friction in a System
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Graduate Wheel moving in rotation and translation
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
Undergrad Friction ON wheels (say a car driving or accelerating)
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
8K
Undergrad Calculating Torque for Rotating Wheels: Factors to Consider
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
High School The physics of flywheel launchers (like tennis ball shooters)
  • · Replies 60 ·
3
Replies
60
Views
7K
Graduate Reaction torque in a traction system
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Undergrad How to quantify gyroscopic precession torque?
  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
5K