Chain wear indicator
Konecranes challenges you to invent a chain wear indicator.
Most hoists are chain hoists, for their strength and reliability, and used for lifting and lowering free movable loads. The lifting movement is generated by an electric motor. The pictures below show the assembly and a chain. During lifting the chain wears. This is acceptable up to a certain level, as defined by the ISO 7592.
Konecranes is looking for new Ideas to detect the chain wear of the chain in a chain hoist. When lifting the chain. At the moment the chain wear is measured by hand with a sliding caliper. Be creative and try to come out with something completely new and innovative by either upgrading the current solution or re-designing the whole concept. Good luck!
Requirements
Wear limit is reached according to ISO 7592, if any of the following conditions are observed:
a) Cracks
b) Serve nicks or gouges
c) Visible distortion
d) Severe corrosion
e) Deposits which cannot be removed
f) The gauge length measured over an 5, 7, 9 or 11 links as appropriate exceeds that of the unused chain by 2% if power driven
g) If interlink wear leaves a rough surface, this indicates that rapid wear is occurring and the chain should be rejected immediatelyPlease note (added Dec 11, 2012):
1. Chain Sizes in mm: 4x11; 5x14; 7x20; 9x27; 11,3x31
2. Budget: Production costs 50€ or ~$65 USD.
3. The solution should be mechanical and should be onboard (part of the hoist). No service tools, please.
4.Ist not allowed to create a new chain!
5. A Tip for design: As the chain wears the links elongate, the pitch circle increases. Perhaps this can be useful for some solutions. For a visual of this effect, download specifications, below.
Rules
Design can be made in any software as long as Step file is provided.
Winning design will be chosen based on the rules and requirements.
The competition is open to everyone.
You can submit several designs.
Team entries are welcome. In case of team win, prize money will be transferred to team leader who is solely responsible for splitting it among team members.
Only models uploaded to GrabCAD library through this challenge page will participate in the competition.
Tag your model with “chain wear indicator”. Only entries with valid tag will participate!
You may upload a private model but you need to share access with kaspar@grabcad.com and Dominik.Mueller@konecranes.com. This will help the judges see your entry.
Privately uploaded models will be made public after the competition deadline.
Competition starts: 30th of October, 2012.
Competition ends: 15th of January 2013 23:59 in the last Time Zone.
Competition winner will be announced here on this Challenge page before 15th of February 2013.
Prizes
Cash prizes of $6,000
- 1st Prize
$3,000 cash
- 2nd Prize
$2,000 cash
- 3rd Prize
$1,000 cash
- 4th Prize
GrabCAD T shirt
- 5th Prize
GrabCAD T shirt
- 6th Prize
GrabCAD T shirt
About the jury?
The jury will be comprised of Konecranes and GrabCAD engineers.
About Konecranes
Konecranes is a world-leading group of Lifting Businesses™, serving a broad range of customers, including manufacturing and process industries, shipyards, ports and terminals. Regardless of your lifting needs, Konecranes is committed to providing you with lifting equipment and services that increase the value and effectiveness of your business.
-
Deadline Passed
-
Total entries 44Private 1
- Who’s in the jury?
-
Kaspar Kiis
GrabCAD -
Eerikki Makinen
Konecranes -
Jürgen Weingaertner
Konecranes -
Dominik Müller
Konecranes
Have an awesome idea for this competition? Want to win cool prizes? Sign-up now to upload your entries.
70 comments
MUSTAFA TOUIL 7 months ago
very interesting ... and 3 months are good... I am in.
Comed 7 months ago
Yeah, finally a challenge where we have the time to work on the sloution.
Nattawat Wongklom 7 months ago
ah interesting!
Michael Sommer 7 months ago
Like the timeframe.
Barbarian 7 months ago
this looks like a decent challenge might give it a go
Romano Gaspari 7 months ago
wow I already worked on this kinda hardware... but It will be hard competion.
Simonr 7 months ago
Do you need a solution that detects all the wear indicators in the requirements or just as many as possible? In terms of winning, would a really good solution for one, out rank an average solution for more than one for example? Will several designs that detect different indicators submitted as a single entry be considered together, or each individually?
Primož 7 months ago
End date is probably 15th of January 2013 (and not 2012 as it is written in rules).
Dave Feathers 7 months ago
I have done several chain wear inspection jobs using my eyeballs and a set of calipers. Beyond that, an infrared photoelectric monitor is the best way to go. Is it just a simple gauge, like used for bicycles and lobsters that you folks are looking for.... Or an all out reversioning of a dye inspector or similar? In other words, what is the budget?
I'm a CM Loadstar / Prostar motor guy myself, and have always replaced chain on visual inspection.
Dave Feathers 7 months ago
How about a copy of ISO 7592. A chain size would be helpful. Link to the tool being used now would be good as well.
William 7 months ago
Nice comp not had much time to enter other comps over the months due to work and study but with 3 months this sounds just great :P
Stephen Nyberg 7 months ago
I have not done chain inspections but I was a Non-Destructive Inspector in the marines and also a CWI and I would have to agree with Dave. I am not sure we can get away from a human visual inspection. But we can make this easier. A copy of the ISO and the chain sizes used in the hoists would be nice.
Could we design a new chain?
I was thinking of incorporating something like DTI washers or "squish" washers to make it more easy to see from a distance if there is an issue in between inspection intervals.
Simonr 7 months ago
I think the idea is to come up with something new, out of the box - like most of the challenges here! I dare say Kona use a wide variety of chain specs for different lifts, so basing the design on a specific one or set of specs may be less useful than something that can adapt to any & all? There are a number of technologies which AFAIK have not been applied to this problem - so lots of scope for innovation!
Simonr 7 months ago
Sorry "Kona" should be "Kone" - it was an iPad substitution!
Stephen Nyberg 7 months ago
I understand where you are coming from Simonr but Konecrane has 7 chain hoist cranes so that is a max of 7 chains (I'm not sure if the all use a different size.) Also, no mater how innovative they or we get, the inspection standards still have to be met. so any new inventive method still needs to meet the standard of the governing body. That is what myself and Dave were going for, not trying to tell people to stay in the box with their thinking but to make sure the box is still included.
Simonr 7 months ago
@Stephen - I agree, there will be not complete substitute for proper testing and getting the different governing bodies to agree to something new in every country is going to be difficult. I thought I'd approach it as an early warning device, rather than try to replace regular testing.
A bit of input from KoneCranes would be good though!
Dave Feathers 7 months ago
Tape measure.
Ibrahim Sanih Ahmed 7 months ago
Sometimes doing too much innovative stuff can increase complexity and thereby increase the overall risks.
If it were up to me, I'd have 3 hd cameras in a triangular arrangement inside an ambient capture box from where the chain moves through at the bottom of the Konecrane device. The image data will by processed. The image processing software should build a 3d model of the chain. Next the application should check the individual links of the 3d model chain for cracks, nicks, distortions, corrosion, deposits and deformation. You'll need a good control image data table to compare and recognize the first five. Deformation can be easily done once you have the 3d model by comparing the chain link lengths against the manufacturer defaults.
Is this possible? Yes. Is it easy? No. Is it expensive. Hell yes!!!
Simonr 7 months ago
@Ibraham
"Sometimes doing too much innovative stuff can increase complexity and thereby increase the overall risks."
Your suggestion sounds complex to me! Although you say it's easy, it's certainly a lot more complex than something analogous to a Tape Measure!
Good idea though!
teigan 7 months ago
automated methods are always more reliable than human inspection. problem is that automation is maintianed by humans too. i'll be opting for a method that measures electrical impedance between links. that requires the least amount of moving parts.
Ibrahim Sanih Ahmed 6 months ago
@Simonr
Hehehe... I think my phrasing might have made you misunderstand what I was trying to state. I was explaining that hypothetical implementation from a software developer's point of view. There are many potential areas where risk's need to be considered in that suggestion. So identifying the risks and tackling them is the hard part. This challenge is targeted for a more subtle approach considering the given timeline and reqs.
And I didn't say it was easy. I stated that it was possible but not easy and definitely very expensive.
Simonr 6 months ago
@Ibrahim
I agree! I just couldn't help but comment on the apparent irony of your statement & solution ;-)
I think a vision system ultimately would be one of the best ways of implementing something like this (so well done!) but as you said, not the cheapest!
In time, I am sure that most critical inspection tasks will be carried out by automated vision systems which are accurate more and objective than Humans!
Nejc Robar 6 months ago
I think it is not a relevant question "how to determine the critical wear". Procedures are known (standardized), relevant question is how to prevent human error. Or how to prevent a chance of use potentially dangerous equipment.
Colin Worobetz 6 months ago
This seems to be largely housekeeping, however I do have an solid solution for measuring the change in length over time. The others, not so much. If I get a chance I can model it, but I know how it will work if nothing else gets submitted, let me know.
teigan 6 months ago
it almost seems silly to model any of these solutions, especially as evidenced by the entries so far.
Sara Sigel 6 months ago
It looks like there are a lot of questions about specifications, we will get answers to you as soon as possible. There is plenty of time still to think of solutions and add your entry - keep thinking!
Sara Sigel 6 months ago
@Eddwin I'm the Community Manager for GrabCAD - I'm not part of the Jury or participating in the Challenge but am just here to help.
Eddwin rodriguez 6 months ago
Perfect , thanks @Sara Sigel
Sara Sigel 5 months ago
We added some new, helpful tips for you under the Rules section. Also, all private entries should be sure to add kaspar@grabcad.com and dominik.mueller@konecranes.com as collaborators so the judges can view your work.
Martijn Loonen 5 months ago
hi, can you explain the chain size? the smallest one has a thickness of 4mm and a pitch of 11 mm? When designing a solution, does it need to be proven on all sizes?
Dominik Müller 5 months ago
It doesn't need to be one solution for all chain sizes
Oleksa 4 months ago
Very useful picture of weared chain link. Ther are many manuals, so I
recommend to print search request in googlevchain hoist mHP0102
Oleksa 4 months ago
chain hoist MHP0102
Igor B 4 months ago
Referencing Konecranes comepetition are you? @Oleksa:) It is maybe better to use operating manuals for Konecranes hoists. I have found XN5 and XN10 technical details online.
Sara Sigel 4 months ago
There will be a delay in visibility for entries as we near the Challenge deadline. Do not worry! I will refresh the entries a few hours after it finishes. I apologize for any confusion or inconvenience.
Ajay Agrawal 4 months ago
my entry still not show their..:(
nima 4 months ago
@ Ajay i have the same problem , Dear Sara please help us
Sara Sigel 4 months ago
I updated the entries, so it may be an issue with your tag. Can you check to make sure you have three separate tags "chain" "wear" and "indicator"?
teigan 4 months ago
i verified the tags. all three were as you specified, and still the entry is not showing.
Simonr 4 months ago
Well, that was a waste of my time! Submit a couple of entries based on the original requirements - then discover they are effectively ruled out by the 'clarification' at the 11th hour!
Drazen 3 months ago
Interesting challenge... 15 days and no comments :)
Sara Sigel 3 months ago
We will announce results by Feb 15 :)
Philippe Voinov 3 months ago
How does simonr have 2nd *and* 6th place?
Sara Sigel 3 months ago
Do not worry @Philippe, I caught that too and we will fix shortly. Sorry for the confusion!
Vincenzo Ricci 3 months ago
congratulations to all the winners!
Igor B 3 months ago
Congratulations to the winners!
Simonr 3 months ago
Guess I'm buying the beer this evening!
Si
Phillip Ross 3 months ago
Congrarulations.
Just can't believe Oleksa's: ''Simple chain extension indicator'' didn't make it.
Branko Stokuca 3 months ago
Congrats to all winners but I have one thing to say. None of the models that is selected is good (according to jury). The first two are not accurate enough so I am asking why choosing something that is not good for you? The third place doesn't work (jury words), again why give it a reword if it doesn't work. The last two places have only one flaw- being expensive. Well gentleman, you can make an omelette without breaking an egg. Meaning if you want something that works flawlessly you must pay pretty penny for it. Because it seams to me that only criteria for the win was the money because you picked the models that are not good (your words, not mine). Good luck with your products.
nima 3 months ago
Congratulation to all the winners , But i agree with Branko Stokuca . Which models are practical and really useful for Konecranes Co. ?
Oleksa 3 months ago
Congratulations to the winners
@Phillip Ross Great thanks. I can't believe too :)
Hm. It's very strange but I see new entries now, that not been after deadline, and can't see few old (I'm not sure in last)
Please, do not get my words as my grievance.
But I have few words about entries:
1-st place: In first mechanical contact is not very good: chain elongation is very-very slow and one micron of radial extension accord to kilometers of tangential motion, links can simply wear mechanical lever or contact.
In second the same idea is present in many entries:
Mechanical contact
chain wear indicator
Mechanical chain wear indicator
and i can't see one old entry
Non mechanical contact:
Konecranes challenges (I'm not sure that it works in this modification)
and my entry Simple chain extension indicator
As for me it's not worse
2-nd: Do yo really think that it's cheap? A few kilograms of excess gears and metal constructions
3-rd: You say It not works. Why you choose it? (It not works really: the lever will slide along the chain link smoothly and will not strike ring (And it not depends from speed))
4-th and 5-th: It's really expensive and cumbersome. I don't see sense to discuss it
Perhaps the jury chosen not meticulously or something else. I'm disappointed
Branko Stokuca 3 months ago
The fact is that we needed to design a measuring instrument. What is the point in having a measuring instrument if it's not accurate. If you are not getting accurate results with one instrument than you must take another instrument to see if the results gained by first are correct. So the question that imposes here is what is the point of having such an instrument? I believe that you will be using calipers for a long time.
Oleksa 3 months ago
1-st place: Hey! PCB is very strange: two wires are shorted - it's no sense to connect them to PCB, and limit switches are connected in parallel - only first switch will signal about elongation.
Of course, it's no problem to fix PCB, but why submit entry with gross mistakes?
3-rd place: I was wrong It will works with unreal speed, but it does not change anything
I can't imagine implemented winned proposals in the real hoist, except maybe 1-st place. This is reason of my disappointing. Because I seen many good entries, and noone from them winv
Simonr 3 months ago
QED
Branko Stokuca 3 months ago
Another question: what was the reason for the poll that grabCAD started regarding this challenge? They were interested in how much time we had spent on this project. It seams to me that the jury wasn't sure which criteria to use, so they took time in the evaluation ;) Why didn't I say that it took me 100000000 hours to finish my exhausting project :)))))
Oleksa 3 months ago
@Branko Stokuca
I don't think so. I hope you are wrong in this question
Branko Stokuca 3 months ago
@http://grabcad.com/oleksa-v. Well this is the question for the GC staff and I doubt that we will get a straight answer. I have participated in many challenges here and never been a part of any poll. This means that this is not something that GC started on there own. This was required by KONECRANES, I am sure. So why would they even care how much time it took us to finish our project? Maybe I am not so wrong.
nima 3 months ago
Dear all i have a idea , in my opinion if GrabCAD and the jury choose the good ideas step by step in duration of 1 month it is better, then we could had such as these discussions before final decision of jury .May that is useful for them .
We should respectful to the jury decision but we can have more kindly technical agument . We can learn more and more from others GrabCAD members then we are winner even if the jury decision was not match with our mind .
Alex 3 months ago
Congratulations to winners!
Igor B 3 months ago
Congratulations to GrabCAD for great engineering challenge. Aiming more for three month challenges could be a good idea, so engineers cant plan their time better, thus resulting in high quality submissions.
As for the results, first I saw @Simonr submission, it blew my mind and I was on a brink of giving up. Seriously great idea. Sorry to see it in second place. It was not very detailed thou.
And I am sorry to see so much flaming here. It is not the first time grabcaders do that after results have been announced. Grow up fellow losers! :P
Branko Stokuca 3 months ago
@Igor B Having doubt in the results, especially when the jury says that designs are not good, is normal thing to have. That is called common sense. Are sure that you have one Mr. winner :)
Eddwin rodriguez 3 months ago
There are many issues that Grabcad need to fix in the challenges,listing some are: 1st once setup the requirements, requirements must to be 100% clear and DO NOT have changes at last time, it gives the impression that exist a lack of good organization or do not care so much to listen the companies that are requesting the Grabcad services. 2nd-I think people that have the final decision to evaluate who are the winners, they must to have an engineering background or at least have a real knowledge in what really means to participate in challenges. 3rd-Grabcadmust to have a real team that can analyze each model and do not just give a fast view to all the entries almost at the end of the challenges and pick up the entries that have good images and do not offer a real functional solution.
analyze solutions, not Sci-fiction model, those let them for toys challenges.Things like this are killing the inspiration and huge potential from designers, inventors and engineers that want to participate also want to offer their talent and earn money from challenges.
thanks, next time I will think twice to get in challenges. TIME IS MONEY, AND TIME DOES NOT FORGIVE.
Sara Sigel 3 months ago
A new 6th place winner has been selected! For those who do not know, you cannot win more than one prize in a challenge. Congratulations to all the winners!
Sara Sigel 3 months ago
@Branko The survey done by GrabCAD on how long members take for their entries was for our use and was not used by the judges or given to them for selection. We were interested to see what kind of commitment goes into entries. @Nima and @Igor I think some sort of period to hash out requirements and kick things off is a very good idea. Thanks :)
Branko Stokuca 3 months ago
All of a sudden GC decides to have a poll :) many challenges happened parallel to this one and no polls. It's hilarious. @http://grabcad.com/eddwin.rodriguez-v I agree with you completely especially with No.3.
Oleksa 3 months ago
LOL, Tnaks, I have no words
I hope this is not because the jury first saw my entry :)
@Phillip Ross Thanks again!1
Oleksa 3 months ago
@Eddwin rodriguez
I think you are right
Phillip Ross 3 months ago
That the chains would be greased was certainly worth a mention in the description. I should have inquered better.
ivan 3 months ago
Congratulations to winners!
imho, Konecranes patents in near 1,5 years display answer about 'who true winner of this challenge'
Oleksa 3 months ago
@Ivan
or their rivals, if they know about this competition ;)
Please log in to add comments.
Log in