The Effect of Strand Arrangement on the Tensile Strength of Multi-Fiber Ropes

Stuart Coles and Daniella Toma

Macomb Mathematics Science Technology Center

Physics

Section 11C

Mr. McMillan / Mrs. Cybulski / Mrs. Tallman

8 June 2017
 The Effect of Strand Arrangement on the Tensile Strength of Multi-Fiber Ropes
Rope is simply a group of smaller fibers arranged into a larger object more fit for

a task and has been used in various forms for various uses since the beginning of

civilization, from using it to build various structures to simple actions such as tying a

shoe. Various uses require ropes to have different properties. In an effort to determine the

effect of manipulating the fibers within a rope on the tensile strength of that rope, an

experiment was carried out using ropes made of braided, twisted, and unmanipulated

fibers. The ropes were used to hang a bucket, and the bucket was then filled with water.

When the weight of the water was great enough to snap the rope, the weight was

measured.

After multiple trials, the breaking points of the strands were compared using an

ANOVA test. The parallel string yielded the highest average tensile strength, with the

braided string at the lowest. The ANOVA test yielded a p-value of 0.000002, leading to a

conclusion that there is a relationship between arrangement of fibers and tensile strength.

Twisting the fibers appeared to have no impact on the tensile strength, yielding a mean

strength roughly equivalent to the unmanipulated fibers. The braided strings had a lower

mean tensile strength than the twisted and unmanipulated fibers.

 Table of Contents

Introduction ............................................................................................................................1

Review of Literature ..............................................................................................................3

Problem Statement .................................................................................................................8

Experimental Design .............................................................................................................9

Data and Observations ...........................................................................................................13

Data Analysis and Interpretation ...........................................................................................23

Conclusion .............................................................................................................................29

Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................33

Appendix A: Constructing the Testing Rig ...........................................................................34

Appendix B: Formulas and Sample Calculations ..................................................................36

Works Cited ...........................................................................................................................41

 Coles Toma 1

Introduction

Since the dawn of human history, humans have been creating tools to help

them accomplish tasks in their day-to-day lives. One of the earliest such tools created by

modern man is the rope. Despite its long history, very little literature exists on the

properties of rope or its structure. Even without extensive documentation, ropes are in

common use for everything from building skyscrapers to rock climbing and towing boats

to tying shoes. Each of these applications uses a slightly different variation on the

concept of rope. Things like bridges tend to use twisted rope while nautical applications

use braids. With so many uses critical to everyday survival, it is important to understand

the factors which affect the strength of the rope in order to create the ideal rope for any

task.

In pursuance of this, the following experiment was carried out to determine if

manipulating the arrangement of fibers within a rope caused a change in overall tensile

strength. To carry out this experiment, a structure was designed and built to test the

tensile strength of a simple rope constructed from a polyester fiber. Ropes were then

constructed using various arrangements - in this experiment braiding, twisting and

parallel to determine if manipulations of fibers within the ropes of the same length would

have an effect on the overall tensile strength. A bucket was then hung from the rope and

filled with water until the rope snapped. The mass of the bucket and its contents was then

found and used to determine the tensile strength of the rope.

Tensile strength is critical for virtually every application of rope, and different

arrangements are more suited for specific tasks. For example, nautical applications are

not particularly sensitive to rope thickness. In these cases, a braided or twisted rope,
 Coles Toma 2

which uses more material to create a rope of a certain length but with higher tensile

strength than a non-manipulated rope, would be appropriate. In other cases, such as

paracord, the quantity of material is critical. In a case like this, it would make more sense

to pick a material with a higher tensile strength without having to braid or twist in order

to achieve a large tensile strength with a smaller amount of material. This research would

help in allowing for determinations like this to be made easily.

With so many real world applications, understanding the properties of a rope and

making correct decisions in rope making is critical for a functioning society. Without

research like that contained herein, the advancement of this basic technology would stall,

severely limiting the ability of society to achieve great physical feats.

 Coles Toma 3

Review of Literature

In designing and carrying out this experiment, many scientific principles were

applied. The purpose of this experiment was to determine the impact of different

arrangements of rope - braided, twisted, and parallel - on the tensile strength of the rope.

The scientific principles at play in this experiment include tensile strength, force

distribution and shock loads.

Tensile strength is defined as the resistance of a material to forces that expand the

material, such as a person stretching elastic or weight pulling down on a rope (Miller).

The maximum tensile strength, measured in newtons, is defined as the amount of weight,

and therefore the amount of force, pulling on the rope when it snaps (Tartaglia).

Figure 1. Free Body Diagram of Experiment

Figure 1, above, shows a free body diagram of the forces acting on the weight in

the experiment. As the weight of the object increased, the force of gravity pulling on it

will also increase. However, the weight did not move any closer to the ground until the

line snapped. This is in line with Newtons first law of motion, that an object at rest will

stay at rest unless acted on by an unbalanced force. The force of gravity, in this example,

was balanced by the force of tension in the rope, which increased directly with the force
 Coles Toma 4

of gravity until the rope ultimately snapped, causing an unbalanced force and allowing

the weight to fall.

The general format for this experiment was not unique, and has been carried out

in many variations for many purposes. Moyer and Everetts Twisting and Braiding --

from Thread to Rope details a similar experiment in which tension was used to

determine the strength of many materials in a single-stranded form, that was neither

twisted nor braided. Twisting and Braiding was published in Science Scope, a peer

reviewed journal intended for educators published by the National Association of Science

Teachers, and written by professors of science of education at The University of

Michigan Dearborn. Although Moyer and Everetts experiment is somewhat imprecise in

that it increased the weight of the suspended object in large increments, the basic concept

of suspending a weight from a string forms the basis for the experiment carried out in this

paper. The results of the Moyer and Everett experiment are not, however, relevant to this

research as that experiment does not, despite the name of the paper, investigate

manipulations of the fibers, but the instead the impact of the composition of the fibers

themselves.

A rope is defined as a bundle of fibers that are twisted, braided, or strung together

(rope). Each of these configurations yields a rope with unique properties. Tensile

strength is one such property, and it is known that larger ropes, with more fibers, are

generally stronger than ropes with less fibers (Moyer and Everett). However, fibers

within a rope that have been twisted or braided are stronger than the same bundle would

be if it were composed of unmanipulated fibers. A hypothetical manipulated rope would

require more material to reach a certain length than one made of straight fibers due to the
 Coles Toma 5

fact that the strands themselves are not oriented in a straight line. The increase in the

amount of material alone should increase strength due to increased ability to balance

forces.

Braiding rope should also increase tensile strength because it allows forces to

balance throughout the strand by crossing and recrossing rope components (Britannica).

This crossing of components allowed not only for the balanced distribution of forces

throughout the strand, but also for movement of the component fibers (Miller). The

movement of the fibrous components allows for the rope to flex while the forces are

being distributed. This results in the rope fibers settling in a slightly different

arrangement than when the force was applied. The space between the fibers in a braided

rope compresses when undergoing tension forces as the fibers slid amongst themselves,

leading to greater strength at the cost of elasticity. Twisting the strands had much the

same effect but to a lesser degree as there are fewer unique points of contact between the

individual strands and less empty space (Moyer). Fewer unique points of contact required

more force to be distributed across each one, while the lack of empty space reduces the

flexibility of the rope, thereby reducing the ability of the rope to distribute the forces

evenly, ultimately resulting in lower tensile strength.

There were many different factors to consider when braiding, including the size,

or angle, of the braid. An angle of approximately 45 within the braid yielded the highest

strength, and is also approximately the natural angle for a very tightly braided rope

(Saraswat et al.). This angle allowed for the greatest freedom of motion and for the

largest contact patch between fibers in a braid.

 Coles Toma 6

45

Figure 2. Forty-Five Degree Braid

Figure 2 makes clear what a 45 braid looks like. It shows how the first step in

braiding would appear, and highlights that the braid angle is measured from a line

parallel to the center strand to the strand being placed over it.

Another important consideration when determining tensile strength, which was

largely overlooked in previous experiments on the subject, is the impact of shock loads.

A shock load is a force resulting from a sudden acceleration, such as when rapidly

applying large amounts of weight to a support structure (Hall). These loads can cause

failure in structures that would otherwise be able to support the weight of the load, if it

were applied more gradually. Certain materials cope with shock loads better than others,

and the ability to absorb shock loads, known as energy absorbing capacity, is unrelated to

tensile strength. However, as the energy absorbing capacity is influenced by the design of

a rope, all experiments of tensile strength must be designed in such a way as to avoid

them. This was achieved by applying weight gradually.

Despite the fact that shock loads have no impact on the real tensile strength, the

apparent tensile strength is impacted by shock loads. Actual tensile strength is, however,
 Coles Toma 7

affected by the force distribution through braid arrangement in combination with the

properties of the material the braid is made of. By controlling the material and reducing

shock loads, the impact of braid arrangement was isolated and quantified.
 Coles Toma 8

Problem Statement
Problem:

To determine the impact of the arrangement of strands in a rope on the tensile

strength of a rope.

Hypothesis:

The braided rope will have the greatest tensile strength.

Data Measured:

The independent variable in this experiment was the arrangement of strands

within the rope (braided, twisted, and parallel). The dependent variable was the tensile

strength of the rope, measured in newtons. An ANOVA statistical analysis test was run to

determine the results, with thirty trials run for each type of manipulated string.
 Coles Toma 9

Experimental Design
Materials:
mm Polyester Thread, 27 m Bucket, 3 gallon
Beaker, 2000 ml in. Painters Tape
Water Scale, .01g precision
Bucket, 1 gallon Scissors
Testing Rig (See Appendix A)

Braiding Preparation Procedure:

1. Cut three strands of string to be 30 cm each using scissors.

2. Lay the three strands of string parallel to each other, with the strands touching but
not overlapping.

3. Wrap tape around one end of the thread to secure it.

4. Pass the leftmost strand over the center strand and under the rightmost strand,
making it the new rightmost strand.

5. Pull the exposed threads to tighten the braid.

6. Repeat step four and five until the entire length of the threads has been braided.

7. Repeat steps one through five thirty times.

Twisting Preparation Procedure:

1. Cut three strands of string to be 30 cm each using scissors.

2. Lay the three strands of string parallel to each other, with the strands touching but
not overlapping.
3.
4. Wrap tape around one end of the three threads to secure them.

5. Twist the thread clockwise until it begins to bunch up.

6. Wrap tape around the unwrapped end of the thread to secure it.

7. Repeat steps one through six thirty times.

 Coles Toma 10

Parallel Preparation Procedure:

1. Cut three strands of string to be 30 cm each using scissors.

2. Lay the three strands of string parallel to each other, with the strands touching but
not overlapping.

3. Wrap tape around both ends of the thread to secure it.

4. Repeat steps one through three thirty times.

Bowline Knot Procedure:

1. Take prepared rope and form a loop by laying the rope over itself.

2. Pull one end of the rope through the loop.

3. Wrap the end of the string that went through the loop around the opposite end,
and back through the loop.

4. Pull taught.

Data Collection Procedure:

1. Label each string one through ninety and then randomize the trials with a
calculator to figure out what order to run trials in.

2. Place the three-gallon bucket underneath the testing rig.

3. Tie one end of the string to the one-gallon bucket using a bowline knot.

4. Tie the other end of the string to the testing rig using a bowline knot, allowing the
string and one-gallon bucket to hang inside the three-gallon bucket.

5. Fill the beaker with water

6. Slowly fill the one-gallon bucket with water using the beaker.

7. When the string snaps, use the scale to weigh the smaller bucket and its contents
 Coles Toma 11

Diagrams:

String
String Testing Rig
1-Gallon Bucket
Testing
Rig

3-Gallon
Bucket

(1-Gallon
Bucket
3-Gallon Bucket Inside)

Figure 3. Diagram of Experimental Setup

Figure 3, above, shows a diagram of how the experiment was set up, including the

bucket, the rope, and the testing rig. Water was poured from a beaker (not pictured) into

the 1-gallon bucket until the string snapped and the one-gallon bucket fell into the bottom

of the 3-gallon bucket. After this, the weight of the bucket was measured.
 Coles Toma 12

Figure 4. Different Types of Manipulated Ropes

Figure 4 above shows the three different rope types described for this experiment.

From left to right, the order shows are the braided rope, twisted rope, and parallel rope.

This is not the same rope described in the materials due to the thinness and difficulty to

differentiate the three.

 Coles Toma 13

Data and Observations

Data:

Table 1
Braided String Data Results
Trial Mass (g) Weight (N) Trial Mass (g) Weight (N)

1 2361.1 23138.8 16 1935.2 18965.0

2 2309.5 22633.1 17 2325.2 22787.0
3 2321.3 22748.7 18 2462.3 24130.5
4 2066.6 20252.7 19 2001 19609.8
5 2292.2 22463.6 20 2456.2 24070.8
6 2166.5 21231.7 21 2345.6 22986.9
7 1651.9 16188.6 22 2256.3 22111.7
8 2205.3 21611.9 23 2025.2 19847.0
9 2404.5 23564.1 24 2125.6 20830.9
10 1970.8 19313.8 25 2308.6 22624.3
11 2276.2 22306.8 26 2100.5 20584.9
12 2508.2 24580.4 27 1996.5 19565.7
13 2653.2 26001.4 28 2450.6 24015.9
14 2323.4 22769.3 29 2560.2 25090.0
15 2100.2 20582.0 30 2050.3 20092.9
Average 2233.7 21890.0
Standard Deviation 217.4 2130.5

Table 1, above, shows mass in grams and weight in newtons that each braided

string held. The average weight that the braided string held was 21890.0 newtons, and the

standard deviation of this set of data was 2130.5. A sample calculation for converting

from grams to newtons is provided in Appendix B.

 Coles Toma 14

Table 2
Parallel String Data Results
Trial Mass (g) Weight (N) Trial Mass (g) Weight (N)

1 2750.1 26951 16 2523.6 22104.9

2 2507.6 24574.5 17 2643.2 25903.4
3 2424.6 23761.1 18 2645.7 25927.9
4 2398.5 23505.3 19 2565.5 25141.9
5 2783.9 27282.2 20 2415.6 23672.9
6 2588.7 25369.3 21 2424.4 23759.1
7 2842.3 27854.5 22 2645.3 25923.9
8 2521.0 24705.8 23 2725.6 26710.9
9 2023.6 19831.3 24 2995.6 29356.9
10 2902.2 28441.6 25 2562.3 25110.5
11 3307.6 32414.5 26 2645.6 25926.9
12 2662.1 26088.6 27 2698.6 26446.3
13 2441.3 23924.7 28 2678.6 26250.3
14 2445.2 27099.9 29 2856.5 27993.7
15 2526.6 24760.7 30 2652.6 28679.7
Average 2637.7 25849.1
Standard Deviation 242.1 2372.4

Table 2, above, shows the weight, given in newtons, and mass in grams that each

set of parallel strings held. The average weight that the parallel strings held was 25849.1

newtons, and the standard deviation of this set of data was 2372.4.
 Coles Toma 15

Table 3
Twisted String Data Results
Trial Mass (g) Weight (N) Trial Mass (g) Weight (N)

1 2360.1 23129.0 16 2452.5 24034.5

2 2695.6 26416.9 17 2765.5 27101.9
3 1801.6 17655.7 18 2488.8 24390.2
4 2702.5 26484.5 19 2562.3 25110.5
5 1374.1 13466.2 20 2413.6 23653.3
6 2345.6 22986.9 21 2604.5 25524.1
7 3060.0 29988.0 22 2489.6 24398.1
8 2789.8 27340.0 23 2325.2 27975.1
9 2601.0 25489.8 24 2256.3 22111.7
10 2915.8 28574.8 25 2950.5 28914.9
11 2204.9 21608.0 26 2653.6 20585.9
12 2396.2 23482.8 27 2126.9 22202.9
13 3118.1 30557.4 28 2398.4 23504.3
14 2502.5 24524.5 29 2890.3 28324.9
15 2324.5 22780.1 30 2103.9 20618.2
Average 2493.0 24431.2
Standard Deviation 370.7 3633.0

Table 3, above, shows the weight, given in newtons, that each set of twisted

threads held. The average weight that the twisted string held was 24431.2 newtons, and

the standard deviation of this set of data was 3633.0.

 Coles Toma 16

Observations:
Table 4
Braided String Observations
Trial Observation

1 The string snapped more toward the bottom of the arrangement.

2 The knot slipped in the middle of pouring water.

3 The string snapped more toward the bottom of the arrangement.

4 The string snapped toward the middle of the arrangement.

5 The string snapped toward the middle of the arrangement.

6 The string snapped toward the top of the arrangement.

7 String snapped at the knot, and the overall length of the string was shorter
than the rest.

8 The knot slipped in the middle of pouring water.

9 The string snapped more toward the bottom of the arrangement.

10 The knot slipped in the middle of pouring water.

11 The string snapped more toward the bottom of the arrangement.

12 The string snapped toward the top of the arrangement.

13 The knot slipped in the middle of pouring water.

14 The string snapped more toward the bottom of the arrangement.

15 The string snapped toward the middle of the arrangement, while the beaker
was being refilled.

16 String snapped really close to the knot, and the overall length of the string
was shorter than the rest.

17 The knot slipped in the middle of pouring water.

18 The string snapped toward the top of the arrangement.

19 String snapped at the knot, and the overall length of the string was shorter
than the rest.

20 The string snapped more toward the bottom of the arrangement.

 Coles Toma 17

Trial Observation

21 The string snapped toward the middle of the arrangement.

22 The knot slipped before the string actually snapped.

23 String snapped really close to the knot,and the overall length of the string
was shorter than the rest.

24 The knot slipped in the middle of pouring water.

25 The string snapped in the bottom of of the arrangement.

26 The string snapped toward the top of the arrangement.

27 The string snapped close to the knot, and the overall length of the string was
shorter than the rest.

28 The string stretched significantly before it snapped.

29 The string stretched significantly before it snapped.

30 The string snapped toward the middle of the arrangement.

Table 4 shows the observations of the braided string trials. For the purposes of

reading the table, unless otherwise specified, the top, middle, and bottom of the

string are all representative of one third of the arrangement, with bottom being nearest to

the bucket. The breaking location was not measured, and is only given approximately.
 Coles Toma 18

Table 5
Parallel Strings Observation
Trial Observation

1 The knot slipped in the middle of pouring water.

2 The string snapped more towards the bottom of the arrangement.

3 The string snapped toward the middle of the arrangement.

4 The knot slipped in the middle of pouring water.

5 The string snapped toward the middle of the arrangement.

6 The string snapped toward the top of the arrangement.

7 String was stretched out significantly before the string snapped.

8 The string snapped toward the middle of the arrangement.

9 The string snapped more toward the bottom of the arrangement.

10 The knot slipped in the middle of pouring water.

11 String was stretched out significantly before the string snapped.

12 The string snapped toward the middle of the arrangement.

13 The string snapped toward the top of the arrangement.

14 The string snapped more toward the bottom of the arrangement.

15 The knot slipped in the middle of pouring water.

16 The string snapped more toward the bottom of the arrangement.

17 The string snapped toward the middle of the arrangement.

18 The string snapped more toward the bottom of the arrangement.

19 The string snapped toward the top of the arrangement.

20 The string snapped more toward the bottom of the arrangement.

21 The knot slipped in the middle of pouring water.

22 The string snapped more toward the bottom of the arrangement.

23 The string snapped toward the top of the arrangement.

 Coles Toma 19

Trial Observation

24 String was stretched out significantly before the string snapped.

25 The knot slipped in the middle of pouring water.

26 The string snapped toward the top of the arrangement.

27 The string snapped toward the middle of the arrangement.

28 The string snapped toward the middle of the arrangement.

29 The string snapped toward the middle of the arrangement.

30 The string snapped toward the top of the arrangement.

Table 5 shows the observations taken during the parallel string trials. For the

purposes of reading the table, the top, middle, and bottom of the string are all

representative of one third of the arrangement, with bottom being nearest to the bucket.
 Coles Toma 20

Table 6
Twisted String Observations
Trial Observation

1 The string snapped toward the middle of the arrangement.

2 String snapped more towards the bottom of the string arrangement.

3 The string snapped at the knot while pouring water, and the overall length of
the string was shorter than the rest.

4 String was stretched out significantly before it snapped.

5 The string snapped at the knot while pouring water, and some of the water
splashed out of the bucket.

6 The string snapped more toward the top of the arrangement.

7 String was stretched out significantly before it snapped.

8 String was stretched out significantly before it snapped.

9 String snapped toward the middle of the arrangement.

10 The knot slipped before the rope snapped, and it was stretched out before it
snapped.

11 The string snapped more toward the bottom of the arrangement.

12 The string snapped toward the middle of the arrangement.

13 String was stretched out significantly before it snapped.

14 The knot slipped in the middle of pouring water.

15 The string snapped toward the middle of the arrangement.

16 The knot slipped in the middle of pouring water.

17 String was stretched out significantly before it snapped.

18 The knot slipped in the middle of pouring water.

19 The string snapped toward the middle of the arrangement.

20 The string snapped toward the top of the arrangement.

21 The string snapped toward the top of the arrangement.

 Coles Toma 21

Trial Observation

22 The string snapped more toward the top of the arrangement.

23 The string snapped toward the middle of the arrangement.

24 The string snapped toward the top of the arrangement.

25 String was stretched out significantly before it snapped.

26 String was stretched out significantly before it snapped.

27 The string snapped toward the top of the arrangement.

28 The string snapped more toward the bottom of the arrangement.

29 String was stretched out significantly before it snapped.

30 The string snapped toward the top of the arrangement.

Table 6 shows the observations taken during the twisted string trials. For the

purposes of reading the table, unless otherwise specified, the top, middle, and

bottom of the string are all representative of one third of the arrangement, with bottom

being nearest to the bucket. The breaking location was not measured, and is only given

approximately.
 Coles Toma 22

Figure 5. Before and After Pictures of Snapped String

Figure 5 above shows before and after pictures taken during the experiment. The

picture on the left shows the white bucked being held up by the string while one

researcher was pouring water into the bucket. The picture on the right shows the string

snapping while the water was being poured.

 Coles Toma 23

Data Analysis and Interpretation

This research and the experiment detailed within were conducted with the intent

to determine whether various arrangements of strands of fibers or string within a rope

led to an overall increase in the tensile strength in the strands of the fiber. The experiment

conducted to determine this was a comparative experiment, comparing three different

arrangements of fibers and their respective tensile strength. This is valuable, as a

comparative experiment allows conclusions to be drawn due to the fact that the

experiment was controlled and the only changes in the environmental circumstances were

made intentionally by the researchers. The trials of this experiment were carried out in a

random order to ensure validity of the data by spreading any possible improvement in

carrying out the experiment across all the categories. In doing so, the likelihood of flawed

data due to technique improvements as the researchers gained experience was reduced.

For the purposes of this experiment, the parallel or straight arrangement of strings

served as a form of control, as the fibers were not manipulated in any way. A control was

used in this experiment to ensure reliable data because it provides a baseline of

comparison to measure the other trials against. Thirty trials were run of each arrangement

of string in order to ensure that a large enough sample size for a valid statistical test

existed. Without replication, the chance that any one outlier experiment could throw off

the data is increased, and the researchers compensated for this. This data was measured in

grams of mass held, and then converted to newtons of force.

In order to determine whether braiding actually has a significant impact on tensile

strength, an ANOVA statistical test was run on the data points gathered during the
 Coles Toma 24

experiment. However, before any test is run, it is necessary and helpful to analyze graphs

of the resulting data.

Figure 6. Boxplot of Data

Figure 6 shows a boxplot of the data collected during the experiment. Marked on

the outside of the boxes are the respective quartiles and any outliers, while the mean of

each group is indicated by the number next to the x within the box. It appears from these

data that the braided ropes had an overall lower tensile strength. Both the mean and

median breaking strength of the braided string were lower than in any other category. In

fact, it is lower than 75% of the data in either of the other categories. Due to the large

range of the twisted string trials, there is overlap between the twisted string and both

other groups. However, it is worth noting that this overlap is minor in the case of the

braided string trials, indicating that there may be a significant difference in the breaking

strengths. The braided and straight strings had such a substantial overlap and such similar
 Coles Toma 25

means that it is unlikely that there is a significant difference between the two based on

this graphical analysis. Also of note, the straight string trials has the largest mean and

median breaking strengths. This may be due to the presence of the outlier, but remains

true even if the outlier is removed from the calculations.

However, due to the variability, this visual analysis is not enough to draw any

conclusions. There is still a statistical test that must be carried out. For the purposes of

this experiment, the ANOVA statistical test was selected. The ANOVA test is appropriate

for this task because it compares means from multiple populations, in this case the

breaking strength of multiple arrangements of string. One requirement for a valid

ANOVA test is that each population be normal. While the central limit theorem states

that any group of samples over size 30 from any population will be normal, and thirty

trials were conducted to ensure this normality, it is worth verifying with normality plots.

Figure 7. Normal probability plot of the braided string data

 Coles Toma 26

Figure 8. Normal probability plot of the straight string data

Figure 9. Normal probability plot of the twisted string data

Figures 7-9, shown above and on the previous page, are normal probability plots

of the findings for each arrangement of string. As the data points for the most part form

an approximately linear arrangement in all three charts, it can be concluded that all three

samples came from populations that are in fact normally distributed, despite the apparent

skewness in the histograms of Figure 6.

 Coles Toma 27

Another requirement for a valid ANOVA test is that all populations have similar

standard deviations. The sample standard deviations of the data for each population were

included in the Data and Observations section of this paper and are reproduced below.

Table 7
Standard Deviations of Each Type of String
Braided String Straight String Twisted String

2130.5 2372.4 3632.9

By observing the values in Table 7, it is evident that the standard deviation of the

twisted string is larger than that of the other two arrangements. This is not surprising,

given the large range observed in the box plot on the previous page. However, the

ANOVA test is not particularly sensitive to the standard deviations of the group. A

common practice is to use the rule that the standard deviations as similar enough for the

purposes of the test if the largest standard deviation is no more than twice the smallest

one. This is the case here, so the test would still be valid under these conditions.

The final requirement for a valid ANOVA statistical test is that the data be from a

random sample. As noted earlier in this section, great care was taken in randomizing this

experiment, fulfilling this condition. As all the conditions have been met, the test can

now be run.

H0 : straight = braided = twisted

Ha : Not all straight, braided, twisted are equal.

Figure 9. Null and Alternative Hypotheses for ANOVA test

Figure 9 shows the two hypotheses used for the ANOVA test. Ho represents the

null hypothesis, that there is no difference between the mean breaking strength, which is

in this case , of any of the three arrangements of string. The alternative hypothesis, Ha,
 Coles Toma 28

simply means that not all of the means are equal, or that there is a difference in at least

one of the means breaking strength.

Figure 11. ANOVA Test Results

Based on information shown in Figure 11, the null hypothesis was rejected. A

calculation of the values of note in Figure 11 is provided in Appendix B. The F value of

15.5 with 2/87 degrees of freedom leads to a p value of 0.000002, which is less than the

standard alpha level of 0.05, which is the barrier of statistical significance. This means

that there is essentially a 0% chance of getting a difference in means of the three different

types of string as extreme as it was by chance alone if Ho were true. Although the p-value

determines this, it does not indicate where that difference is. Based on the box plot in

Figure 6, it appears that the mean tensile strength of the braided string is lower than that

of the other two arrangements. However, the box-plots do not give a clear indication of

the relationship between the straight strings and the twisted strings. A t test was carried

out on these data and found no statistically significant difference between the two values.
 Coles Toma 29

Conclusion

The purpose of this experiment was to determine the impact of the arrangement of

strands in a rope on the tensile strength of the rope. The experiment tested the tensile

strength of a rope created from a polyester fiber. Three different arrangements were used-

braided, twisted, and parallel. A bucket was then hung from the rope and filled with water

until the manipulated rope snapped. To find the tensile strength of the rope, the mass of

the bucket and the water were determined in grams using a scale and then converted to

newtons of force. The force on the rope when it snapped was determined to be the

maximum tensile strength of the rope. It was hypothesized that the braided rope would

have the highest tensile strength.

The hypothesis was rejected because the data collected from the experiment

showed that the braided rope actually had the lowest tensile strength of the three

arrangements. In fact, the arrangement that had the highest tensile strength was the

twisted arrangement. The braided, parallel, and twisted arrangements of rope had an

average tensile strength of 21890.0 newtons, 25849.1 newtons, and 24431.2 newtons

respectively. The data was then analyzed with an ANOVA test to determine a p-value.

The F value of 15.5 with 2/87 degrees of freedom leads to a p value of 0.000002, which

is less than the alpha level of 0.05. This means that there is essentially a 0% chance of

getting a difference in means of the three different types of string as extreme as it was by

chance alone if the null hypothesis were true. A t-test was run that determined that the

twisted and parallel strands did not have significantly different means. This means that

the significant difference found in the ANOVA test was based on the braided string

having the lowest mean tensile strength. As the braided string had the lowest mean tensile
 Coles Toma 30

strength, it was concluded that the braided string does not have the highest mean tensile

strength.

The results differed from expectations because the experimental design failed to

fully accommodate for specific properties of the material used in the experiment when

forming the hypothesis. The polyester fiber used in the experiment was found to

withstand extreme stretching. However, the downward and upward forces were not the

only forces applied to the load bearing ropes. There were also shear forces at play, forces

perpendicular to one rope and through another when the ropes were pressed together.

Net Tension

Shear Forces

Weight

Figure 12. Forces on the Fibers

Figure 12 shows a simplified representation of the shear forces applied by one of

the strands of the braided string on another. As can be seen, these forces cross the center

strand at odd angles. These forces were exacerbated by the application of weight, and

therefore tension, which caused the braided strands to press together which increased

shear forces. Initially, this contact allows for improved distribution of forces. However,

beyond a certain point which is dependent on the material, shear forces are liable break

the strand, much like tensile forces (Miller). The specific polyester strand used in the
 Coles Toma 31

experiment was not resistant to these forces. As a result, the fibers in the braided string

sliced through each other. The fibers in the twisted and parallel strands did not experience

these forces, as they did not have as many points of contact to transfer shear forces and

therefore did not slice.

In addition to the design oversights, the experiment was subject to flaws in

execution. One flaw throughout the experiment was the variance in the rope length right

before it was tested. Originally, 30 centimeters of rope were cut and manipulated in

accordance with the experimental design, but when tying the knots around the bucket and

testing rig, the total length of the rope was shortened by various amounts. The

observations indicate that shorter strands appeared to have a lower tensile strength -

perhaps due to a reduced ability to stretch and to distribute the load among the strands -

which may have had an impact on the mean tensile strength. Another flaw was

consistency while pouring water. When the rope snapped, the flow of water did not stop

instantaneously as those performing the experiment had to react to stop the flow. Due to

this, some excess water may have made its way into the bucket, so the measured tensile

strength for each trial may not have been a perfectly accurate representation of the true

tensile strength of each strand.

Despite these errors, the results of this experiment are still of value to the

scientific community. The findings of shearing leading to a reduction in overall tensile

strength in this experiment should be considered when designing future ropes so as to

ensure that the material the rope is made from is fit for its purpose. Further study into the

resistance of various materials to various shear forces would aid in determining the ideal

material for any purpose, such as selection of materials for bridge designs or rescue
 Coles Toma 32

operations. Also noted in this experiment was that twisting the strands had no impact on

the tensile strength of the rope. This will save a rope designer quite a bit of time when

trying to determine the ideal rope. However, using a more rugged thread than the

polyester sewing thread may change that finding as well, because the twists may not be as

large and the contact patches between strands would be larger, thereby distributing the

forces over a wider area resulting in less overall strain. This should also be investigated.

These results are also practically applicable in daily life. The average person uses

ropes in some form nearly constantly, from assisting in lifting heavy objects to using

pulleys. Often, these rope systems can be improvised, such as when securing a package

with twine and using that same twine to lift the package. Using the results of this

experiment, it can be recommended that one should not braid a rope for any improvised

system such as this, as it is possible that braiding may actually reduce the structural

integrity of the material. Without knowing the properties of the material in question, it

cannot be safely assumed that braiding will increase structural integrity.

Despite, and perhaps because of this uncertainty, the experimental results were in

agreement with modern scientific understanding of rope behavior, although inconsistent

with the expectations based on the found literature. For this particular material, braiding

the fibers resulted in a reduction of mean tensile strength. However, these results cannot

be generalized to all materials and call for further study of the topic.
 Coles Toma 33

Acknowledgements

A special thanks to Mr. McMillan and Mrs. Cybulski for the help and advice that

they provided during the research process. Another thanks to Mr. Coles, for providing the

materials and working space to build the testing rig. Without these helpful individuals,

this research wouldnt have run as smoothly as it did.

 Coles Toma 34

Appendix A: Constructing the Testing Rig

Materials:
(3) 1 ft. pieces in. PVC Pipe
(2) 2 ft. pieces in. PVC Pipe
(4) 6 in. pieces in. PVC Pipe
(6) 90 in. PVC Elbows
(2) in. Tee PVC Holders

Procedure:
1. Place one six-inch piece in each end of the tee PVC holders.

2. Using the six-inch pieces and the tees, four 90 elbows, and two of the one foot
pieces, form a square.
3. Orient the tee PVC holders so that the open hole faces upward

4. Place the two-foot pieces into the top opening of the tee.

5. At the top of each two-foot piece, place a 90 PVC elbow.

6. Use the final one-foot piece of PVC to connect the two PVC elbows.

Diagrams:

2 ft.

1 ft.
Figure 1. Diagram of Testing Rig Setup

Figure 1, above, shows a diagram of how the testing rig was set up. A square at

the bottom is created with PVC, four elbow holders, and two tee holders. From the two

tee holders are the two 2 foot pieces, and then they are connected at the top with an elbow
 Coles Toma 35

holder. The string was tied to the top PVC bar and then the bucket hang from the string

until it broke.
 Coles Toma 36

Appendix B: Formulas and Sample Calculations

All data in this experiment was mass collected in grams, but the true quantity of

interest was breaking strength when subject to force, which is measured in newtons.

Conveniently, the force in newtons, N, can be found using a simple formula. Here,

mass is represented by m and the acceleration on earth due to gravity is represented by

g.

A sample calculation is shown below, using 9.8 m/s2 as the acceleration due to

gravity on Earths surface.

= 2361.1 9.8

= 23138.8

Figure 1. Sample Calculation of Force

In Figure 1, a calculation was carried out to determine the force in newtons of one

trial. This same calculation was done with the data from each trial. An ANOVA test was

then carried out on the converted data, using the formula below. F is the test statistic of

the ANOVA test, and the other variables will be defined later in this appendix.

Before this test can be run, numerous other values must be determined. To assist

in doing this, relevant data from the experiment has been reproduced.
 Coles Toma 37

Table 1
Relevant Data for ANOVA Test
Populations s n

Braided 21890.0 2130.5 30

Parallel 25849.1 2372.4 30

Twisted 24331.2 3633.0 30

Table 1 represents the means with x-bar, sample standard deviation with s, and

the size of each population with n. Note that the x-bars in the table above are the x-bars

for the group, not the overall x-bar used in determining the mean square group. The

formula for determining that x-bar is shown below. Lowercase n represents number of

samples in each population, capital N is the total number of all samples, and the x-bars

with subscripts are the population means shown in Table 1.

+ +
=

A sample calculation for determining that x-bar is shown.

+ +
=

30 21890.0 + 30 25849.1 + 30 24331.2
=
90

= 24023.4

Figure 2. Sample Calculation of x-bar

Figure 2, above, shows a sample calculation for determining x-bar using the data

from the experiment. Using that value, the mean square group (MSG) can now be

computed using the formula shown on the following page, where all variables represent

what they represented before, and I is the total number of populations, which is 3.
 Coles Toma 38

( )2 + ( )2 + ( )2
=
1

A sample calculation is shown.

( )2 + ( )2 + ( )2
=
1

30(21890.0 24023.4)2 + 30(25849.1 24023.4)2 + 30(24331.2 24023.4)2

=
31

= 1.2 108

Figure 3. Sample Calculation of MSG

Figure 3 shows a sample calculation of the mean square group, which is integral

to the ANOVA test. The other main component in determining the ANOVA statistic is

the mean square error, or MSE, defined by the following formula, where s is the standard

deviation of each group.

( 1) 2 + ( 1) 2 + ( 1) 2
=

A sample calculation for mean square error is shown.

( 1) 2 + ( 1) 2 + ( 1) 2
=

(30 1)2130.52 + (30 1)2372.42 + (30 1)3633.02

=
90 3

= 7.8 106

Figure 4. Sample Calculation of MSE

Figure 4 shows the calculation of the last component in determining the ANOVA

test statistic, the mean square error. Now that the necessary values have been found, the

statistic itself can be computed.

 Coles Toma 39

1.2 108
=
7.8 106

1.2 108
=
7.8 106

= 15.4

Figure 5. Sample Calculation of F

Figure 5 shows a sample calculation of F, the ANOVA test statistic. This value of

F is slightly different from the one presented in the main text of the paper, which was

15.5, as the value in the paper was generated by a calculator program and thus was not

subject to rounding error, which is inevitable when performing these computations by

hand.

Once the F statistic has been found, the P value can be found using any F

distribution chart, with degrees of freedom found as follows.

1
=

Using this setup, the degrees of freedom can be found.

1
=

31
=
90 3

2
=
87

Figure 6. Degrees of Freedom

Figure 6 shows the calculation necessary in determining the number of degrees of

 Coles Toma 40

freedom to be used when determining the P-value.

 Coles Toma 41

Works Cited

Hall, Delbert L. "Understanding shock loads." TD&T [Theatre Design & Technology],

Spring 2013, p. 46+. Academic OneFile,

go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?p=AONE&sw=w&u=lom_accessmich&v=2.1&id=GA

LE%7CA332379147&it=r&asid=8a93a81c9410640aa122deed55eafd6e.

Accessed 18 Mar. 2017.

Miller, Brett A. "FAILURE ANALYSIS of Wire Rope." Advanced Materials &

Processes, vol. 157, no. 5, 2000, p. 43. Academic OneFile,

go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?p=AONE&sw=w&u=lom_accessmich&v=2.1&id=GA

LE%7CA62770414&it=r&asid=ed6605995233f7646b416872ee6a19db.

Accessed 16 Mar. 2017.

Moyer, Richard H., and Susan A. Everett. "Twisting and braiding--from thread to rope."

Science Scope, Dec. 2013, p. 72+. Academic OneFile,

go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?p=AONE&sw=w&u=lom_accessmich&v=2.1&id=GA

LE%7CA350787604&it=r&asid=761f697c4f995b94cdbca70153f7b1ba.

Accessed 16 Mar. 2017.

"Rope." Britannica School, Encyclopdia Britannica, 14 Aug. 2008.

school.eb.com/levels/high/article/rope/64061. Accessed 16 Mar. 2017.

Saraswat, Harshvardhan, et al. "Tensile behaviour of multi-layered braided structures."

Journal of Materials Science, vol. 49, no. 18, 2014, p. 6427+. Academic OneFile,

go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?p=AONE&sw=w&u=lom_accessmich&v=2.1&id=GA

LE%7CA377662809&it=r&asid=439d586c4949d91e363d7ca332fc1861.

Accessed 18 Mar. 2017.

 Coles Toma 42

Tartaglia, Sgt Matthew H. "Ropes and Knots." Ropes and Knots. N.p., n.d.

http://www.ussartf.org/ropes_knots.htm. Accessed 18 Mar. 2017.