Wire Ropes
Wire Rope Configuration
Wire rope is a vital machine element for transmitting
tensile forces and motion. Describing wire rope or
cable as a machine is generally accepted, as it has
multiple moving parts that transfer force and
dynamically distribute the applied loading to perform
useful work. These versatile constructs are used in a
wide variety of industries and in very severe appli-
cations. The purpose of this article is to explain the
complicated selection, use, care, inspection, and
failure analysis of wire rope.
1. Development and Applications
The archaeological record shows that Stone Age man
invented natural fiber ropes. The use of metal wires to
manufacture much stronger ropes began over 2500
years ago. Modern stranded wire rope was primarily
developed and refined in the last 200 years. Many of
the advances were application oriented, for silver
mine hoists, railways, and cable cars. Foremost
among the primary advantages of wire rope is that
it can transmit very high forces and remain flexible.
Rope can withstand multiaxis bending that is not
always possible in other flexible tensile members,
such as chain. Standard wire rope consists of many
individual wires, precisely arranged into strands that
are assembled into a rope, as shown in Fig. 1. It is the
continuous realignment of the individual wires and
strands that permits the assembly to endure the
tension, torsion, bending, and compression forces
applied in service.
Wire rope service is typically categorized as static
or dynamic. These categorizations are significant, as
the concerns accompanying each are substantially
different. Static or stationary applications include
tower supports, guy wires, suspension bridge sup-
ports, and electrical power transmission lines. Dy-
namic applications are usually for pulling or lifting,
and include elevators, te! le! fe! riques (aerial cable cars),
cranes, hoists, dredges, and control cables. Dynamic-
ally stressed ropes require flexibility to pass over
sheaves and onto drums.
Figure 1
Diagram of wire rope components.
2.
The basic element of a wire rope is metal wire. Wire is
manufactured from rod by successive cold drawing
processes until the final diameter and strength level
are attained. Interim annealing processes are required
to restore the requisite ductility between successive
drawing steps. The high strength of rope wires is due
to cold work rather than heat treatment operations.
The wires are then fabricated into rope by automatic
stranding machinery. All of the properties of wire
ropes are a result of the wire manufacturing, wire
sizes, and the manner in which the wires are arranged.
The descriptions of wire rope for design or
selection purposes have been standardized. A normal
description contains the following attributes: length,
diameter, construction, lay, grade, finish, core, and
lubrication. These characteristics are described below
and the appropriate designations are summarized in
Table 1. Many standard organizations have prepared
detailed specifications for wire rope, including ASTM
A 1023 and ISO 2408.
Length. The length of a wire rope in meters or feet.
Diameter. A rope’s nominal or rated size is
measured across the circumscribed diameter, rather
than across the flat sides of the geometric shape that is
formed (e.g., such as a hexagon or octagon). Individual
wire diameters are not usually specified, but will be
dependent upon the rope size and construction.
Construction. The design configuration of a wire
rope is called the construction. The number of
strands and wires is the class of the rope and is
included in the construction. The most widely used
class is 6
25, for six strands of 25 wires. Rope
strands were originally made with a single wire
diameter in single-layer construction. As wires get
larger, more unused space exists between the wires,
reducing both the load-bearing cross-sectional area
and the crushing resistance. Several mixed wire size
strand constructions were developed in the 1800s to
optimize properties as more severe applications were
envisioned for wire ropes.
Various cross-sections of ropes are shown in Fig. 2.
The Warrington (W) construction contains alternat-
ing wire sizes to form a more compact, dense
arrangement. The Seale (S) strand arrangement
contains alternating layers of wire sizes, with larger
diameter wires on the exterior. Filler wire (FW)
constructions contain auxiliary interior wires that
serve primarily to support the rope’s geometrical
configuration under loading. Small filler wires also
provide some cushioning as the outer wires seat better
on the intermediate or inner wires. Hybrid strand
constructions of numerous layers are used, often
requiring complex multiple stranding operations.
Additional constructions contain nonround wires,
plastic-coated strands, and other features for very
specialized service characteristics. For example, the
locked coil tramway cable shown in Fig. 2 was
1
Wire Ropes

Table 1
Standard steel wire rope identifications.
Characteristic Description Designation
Length Linear length meters (feet)
Diameter Nominal diameter or size centimeters (inches)
Construction Number of strands by number of wires per strand e.g., 6
25
Single layer—uniform wire diameter in strand None
Warrington—alternating wire sizes in a single layer W
Seale—alternate layers of different wire sizes S
Filler wire—fine wires between layer wires FW or F
Lay Right regular lay—strands laid right and strand wires laid left RRL or sZ
Left regular lay—strands laid left and strand wires laid right LRL or zS
Right lang lay—strands laid right and wires laid right RLL or zZ
Left lang lay—strands laid left and wires laid left LLL or sS
Alternate lay—regular and lang lay strands alternate RAL/LAL
Grade Traction steel TS
Plow steel PS
Improved plow steel IPS
Extra-improved plow steel EIPS or XIPS
Extra-extra-improved plow steel EEIPS or XXIPS
Finish Bright–uncoated, bare wires B
Galvanized—zinc or zinc alloy coated wires G
Core Fiber core FC
Wire strand core WSC
Independent wire rope core IWRC
Lubrication Special requirements
Adapted from Wire Rope Technical Board (1993) and ASTM A 1023 (2002).

developed for high strength and abrasion resistance.
The interlocking construction prevents broken wires
from protruding from the rope.
High-strength straight wires evince spring behavior;
therefore, the spiral stranding into a rope will result in
residual stresses within the individual wires and
strands. These stresses are superimposed onto applied
stresses, thereby reducing the safe working load
permissible. Preforming is a process where wires and
strands are mechanically formed into the nested helices
they assume in the rope, minimizing inherent residual
stresses. The reduction in internal friction is also
manifested as better flexibility and fatigue resistance.
Lay. The strand lay, or lay direction, of a rope is
the direction strands are laid around the core, and the
direction wires are laid around the strands. Five
standard lays are shown in Fig. 3 with their designa-
tions included in Table 1. Regular lay and lang lay
ropes exhibit substantially different characteristics.
Regular lay ropes are typically easier to handle and
are not prone to untwisting in hoisting applications
with suspended loads. The axial lay of the wires in
lang lay ropes provide better flexibility and fatigue
resistance, but they are less resistant to crushing
under heavy loading.
Alternate lays are special-purpose constructions of
alternating regular and lang lay strands. Rotation-
resistant ropes are available, using greater numbers of
strands or strands with successive layers laid in
opposite directions. The term rope lay or pitch is used
to signify the distance in which one exterior strand
makes a complete revolution about the core. The lay
length is of particular importance in visual inspec-
tion, as described in Sect. 6.
Grade. Most wire ropes are made from steel. Steel
rope wires are classified by a number of historical
names, but these are somewhat imprecise. The
strength grades include traction steel, plow steel,
and various grades of improved plow steel. Ropes
and cables are also made from stainless steel,
aluminum, copper alloys and other specialty materi-
als. These materials are discussed in greater depth
in Sect. 4.
Finish. The finish of a steel wire rope indicates
whether it is coated. Most ropes have a bright finish,
indicative of uncoated steel. Galvanized (zinc-coated)
ropes provide better corrosion resistance and are
usually used for static service, such as ship rigging,
guy wires, and suspension bridge supports. These
ropes are not for heavy hoisting and they abrade

2

Figure 2
Typical wire rope constructions: (a) 7
7 WSC,
(b) 6
19 Warrington construction with a fiber core
(W FC), (c) 8
19 Seale construction with a fiber core
(S FC), (d) 6
21 Filler wire construction with an
IWRC (FW IWRC), (e) 6
26 Warrington–Seale
construction with an IWRC (WS IWRC), and (f) locked
coil tramway cable. Shading is representative of a fiber
core.
easily, removing the protective zinc. Polymeric coat-
ings are also available.
Core. The outer strands of a wire rope are laid
about a core. The core acts primarily as a foundation
for the outer strands, which carry most of the load.
The type of core has a substantial influence on the
properties of a wire rope. Cores are identified as fiber
core (FC), wire strand core (WSC), or independent
wire rope core (IWRC).
Fiber cores do not add any mechanical strength to
wire ropes, only modest support for the outer strands
to prevent crushing. The natural materials used for
these cores include manila, sisal, cotton, hemp, and
jute. Synthetic fiber cores from extruded petrochem-
ical resin are also used, predominantly polypropylene
Wire Ropes
Figure 3
Diagrams of several standard wire rope lays: (a) right
regular lay, (b) left regular lay, (c) right lang lay, (d) left
lang lay, and (e) right alternate lay. Each depiction is a
single rope lay.
(PP). Fiber materials can be severely degraded by
drying or charring. Fiber cores are not suitable for
service over 82 1C (180 1F) (Wire Rope Technical
Board 1993). Wire strand cores and independent wire
rope cores add from 7% to 10% to the strength of a
wire rope, but do not provide some FC benefits, such
as greater flexibility and lubricant retention. Metal
core ropes exhibit better crushing resistance than
fiber core ropes.
Lubrication. Like most machines with moving
parts, wire ropes and cables require lubrication.
Lubrication reduces friction between individual
wires, between strands, between coils of rope, and
between the rope and other surfaces, such as sheaves
and drums. The wires and strands must slide in
relation to each other to permit stress distribution
and equalization. Fiber cores act as an effective
reservoir for a continuous supply of lubricant.
A variety of different lubricants are used in wire
ropes, dependent upon the specific service conditions.
Lubricants include natural and manmade substances,
such as boiled linseed oil and graphite greases, but
are usually petroleum oil based. Additives may be
included in these compounds to provide better
adherence to the wires, increase water repellence,
3
Wire Ropes

improve heat degradation resistance, prevent drying,
and other properties.
The most important lubrication is added during
rope assembly, when all strands and individual wires
are accessible. Ropes are frequently relubricated to
replace the material that physically exudes out due to
flexure, or is affected by thermal degradation or
chemical reaction. Some types of service are not
conducive to adequate, perpetual lubrication. Service
in soil and rock, such as dredging, will accumulate
dirt and wear particles that enter the rope and cause
wear. Ropes in this type of service must be replaced
frequently.
An example of wire rope specification is as follows:
100 m 25 mm 6
25 RRL EIPS Galv IWRC. This
would indicate 100 m of 25 mm rope, 6
25 con-
struction, right regular lay, extra improved plow
steel, galvanized wires, with an independent wire rope
core. Rope does not always lend itself to manufac-
turer identification markings; however, some manu-
facturers use color-coded fiber cores or strands to
identify their product.
3. Properties and Selection
Many aspects of intended service and their relative
importance must be considered in the selection of a
wire rope. These characteristics include loading
magnitude, loading type (constant or variable),
abrasion, acceleration, sheaves and attachments,
environment, economy, safety, etc. The primary wire
rope selection factors are strength, fatigue resistance,
damage resistance, crushing resistance, and reserve
strength. The properties of interest in the selection of
wire ropes are listed and explained individually, but it
must be kept in mind that these properties cannot be
considered separately. All attribute choices can affect
other performance characteristics, which is the classic
design compromise in engineering decisions.
3.1 Strength
The only mechanical property of wire ropes that is
specified is the minimum breaking force (MBF) or
nominal strength. Minimum wire strengths are also
specified in some cases. Strength ratings are listed in
many specifications such as ASTM A 1023, US
Federal Specification RR-W-410E, and ISO 2408.
Strength ratings are specified for types and classes of
constructions, such as 6
19 and 6
37. For
example, as shown in Table 2, 6
19 S, 6
21 FW,
6
26 WS, and 6
25 FW are all considered 6
19
constructions and would have an equivalent strength
requirement. Galvanized rope is rated 10% lower.
Unfortunately, there is no reliable way to measure
rope strength without excision of a test length,
perhaps making the rope unusable. During strength
testing, rope cannot be gripped in normal vise jaws,
as the crushing and nonuniform stress distribution
will produce arbitrarily low results. Testing specifica-
tions suggest proper socketing of the wire ends
(ASTM A 931 2002, ISO 3108 1974).
The strengths of wire ropes are usually 80–95% of
the aggregate wire strengths, dependent upon con-
struction. A portion of the applied axial stress is
accommodated as shear, due to the helical geometry.
Wire cross-sections are usually depicted as circular
for illustrative convenience, but they are elliptical.
The actual metallic areas of ropes are published in
tables and some are included in Table 2. Filler wires
are traditionally excluded from metallic area deter-
minations.
Strength is the only really quantifiable property
that can be used by a designer. The remaining rope

Table 2
X-chart showing the general relationship between abrasion and bending fatigue resistances.
Outside Reserve Minimum
Metallic wires per strength sheave
Construction Relative comparisons area (in2a) strand (%) ratio (D/d b)
6×7 Least bending Greatest 0.451 6 8 42
6 × 19 S fatigue abrasion 0.470 9 32 34
6 × 21 FW resistance resistance 0.478 10 36 26
6 × 26 WS 0.476 10 36 30
6 × 25 FW 0.483 12 43 26
6 × 31 WS Least Greatest 0.481 12 43 30
6 × 36 WS abrasion bending 0.485 14 49 20
6 × 41 SFW resistance fatigue 0.491 16 54 21
6 × 46 SFW resistance 0.492 18 58 18
Adapted from Wire Rope Technical Board (1993).
a Metallic area assumes 1 in rope diameter, and IWRC. b D/d ratio is the sheave diameter divided by the rope diameter.

4

characteristics are qualitatively comparable through
service evaluation and historical experience. For
specification use, a design or safety factor is always
applied. This factor is the ratio of nominal rope
strength to the service load, and is rarely less than 5
for normal service.
3.2 Fatigue Resistance
Bending fatigue and vibration fatigue resistance are
probably the most important nonquantifiable pro-
perties of a wire rope. Bending fatigue resistance
is related to flexibility, but these terms are not
synonymous. Fatigue resistance is a measure of
endurance, while flexibility is the relative ease of
bending. Flexibility is of greater importance in
dynamic ropes; static ropes can be more rigid.
Construction and core type contribute to greater
cracking resistance. As shown in Table 2, greater
numbers of smaller strand wires provide better
fatigue resistance. This is the greatest benefit of
the Warrington construction. Single operation
stranding provides better exterior and interior wire
alignment and increases fatigue resistance. Lang lay
ropes are superior to regular lay ropes. Bending
diameter and attachment variables directly affect the
fatigue performance of dynamically loaded ropes.
Reversed bending should be avoided because it has
been shown to reduce rope life as much as 50%.
Both static and dynamic service can apply
vibration loading to wire ropes that can lead to
fracture. Seemingly innocuous small vibrations can
be amplified harmonically to levels above the endur-
ance limit, the stress level below which service life is
theoretically infinite. Static ropes and quiescent
dynamic ropes often fail by vibration if no active
damping is provided, or if assumptions of isolation
from vibration are erroneous.
3.3 Damage Resistance
Wire ropes require substantial resistance to abrasion
and physical damage in dynamic service. Contact
with sheaves, drums, or pulleys, and overwinding can
cause severe degradation to rope wires. The effect of
abrasion is to wear the outside wires, reducing the
mechanical strength. Abrasion is a function of many
characteristics including relative hardness, pressure,
lubrication, and work-hardening characteristics.
Abrasion resistance can be maximized by using larger
outside, or cover strands, as in a Seale construction.
Lang lay is also somewhat better than regular lay, as
individual wires may need to abrade more prior to
bending fracture. Abrasion can also cause micro-
structural alteration, work hardening, and can
facilitate corrosion. Other damage such as peening
of outer wires can occur.
Wire Ropes
3.4 Crushing Resistance
Crushing occurs when applied stresses result in
permanent collapsing damage in a rope. The axial
and bending forces collapse and compress the core
along with displacement of the outer strands. Crushed
spots result in stress concentration. Excessive pressure
and improper sheave geometry often cause crushing.
Smaller rope diameters and metallic cores provide
better crushing resistance than larger diameters and
fiber cores. Larger strand core wires in flexible ropes
have reduced metallic area, providing less crushing
resistance. Overwinding, where multiple layers of rope
are applied to a drum, is not advisable for highly
loaded ropes with low inherent crushing resistance.
3.5 Reserve Strength
Reserve strength is the percentage of cross-sectional
area of interior strand wires, those that would be
unaffected by normal abrasion of the outer wires. This
is a conservative comparison attribute used to estimate
how much of the strength likely remains after signi-
ficant service, making the assumption that all surface
wires in each strand are fractured. Reserve strengths
for different rope configurations can be as high as
60% for finer wire strands. Representative published
reserve strengths are included in Table 2. High reserve
strengths are required in applications where the
potential consequences of rope failure are severe.
3.6 Additional Considerations
(a) Stretching. Wire ropes stretch in service. Some
initial stretching is permanent and is known as
constructional stretch. This results from seating of
the wires and also results in slight diameter constric-
tion. This may occur quickly in highly stressed ropes
and gradually in moderately stressed ropes. The
constructional stretch of wire rope is dependent on
construction and is usually between 0.25% and
1.00%. A breaking-in period with the loading
gradually increasing to the operating load will ensure
that the rope is properly stretched.
This stretching could be disastrous in many applica-
tions, especially in static service where the rope length
is a fundamental design characteristic. Prestressed
ropes can be ordered to avoid constructional stretch.
One method prescribed for prestretching or prestres-
sing rope is to load it three times to 40% of the rated
strength for 5 min, reducing the load to 5% between
cycles, followed by release of the load (Federal
Specification RR-W-410E 2002). Additional reversible
stretching occurs throughout the life of a dynamically
stressed rope, as a function of stress magnitude. Elastic
strain recovery behavior permits the wires to elongate
under load and revert to their former shape when the
load is released. Equations for estimating elastic
stretching during service have been developed.
5
Wire Ropes
The Young’s (elastic) modulus of metals is micro-
structure insensitive, meaning that the modulus is
similar, regardless of mechanical and thermal proces-
sing. As an assembly, however, wire rope can exhibit
a varying modulus, dependent upon the construction,
grade, and loading. The modulus will gradually
increase in heavily loaded ropes. Ropes that are
overloaded in service can exhibit permanent elonga-
tion and an accelerated reduction in useful life.
The elastic or proportional limit of wire rope, the
point at which permanent deformation takes place, is
B55–65% of the breaking strength.
(b) Sheave design. Proper sheave selection is essen-
tial for maximizing rope life. Suitable rope diameters
for existing sheaves and suitable sheaves for selected
ropes have been studied at great depth. Sizing
recommendations are usually expressed as D=d, or
the ratio of sheave to rope diameter, and some are
included in Table 2. Bending fatigue failure is very
often a direct result of undersized sheaves and drums.
When small radii of curvature are used, the fore-
shortened underside strands cannot move sufficiently
to accommodate the compressive forces, resulting in
buckling. In addition, improper reeving design may
not effectively distribute loading between multiple
rope sections.
The radial pressure between rope and sheave is
another variable considered in sizing decisions.
Equations for radial pressure have been published by
many sources. Drums for highly stressed ropes have
grooves machined to match the rope diameter, for
better construction support. The contours of sheave
grooves are abraded in service, requiring periodic
sheave inspection to prevent accelerated rope wear.
(c) Attachments. Wire ropes perform useful work
through attachment by fittings, clamps, and con-
nectors. These components are necessary to fabricate
hoists, slings, and controls. The efficiency of the
connection will influence the permissible load on the
assembly in order to retain the same safety factor. A
table of attachment efficiencies is shown in Table 3.
Sockets and swaged fittings are typically the strongest
attachments. Even when correctly affixed, fittings are
highly stressed and can be a preferential failure
location. Poorly attached clamps and fittings cause
disproportionate loading. Efficiencies can drop dra-
matically if the rope ends are free to rotate. Splicing,
which is the interweaving of rope ends, can create
endless rope lengths for service such as cable cars.
4. Rope Materials of Construction
Carbon steel wire ropes are by far the most abundant,
due to their high strength and relatively low cost. The
standard grades have typical carbon content ranges
6
Table 3
Efficiencies of some standard rope attachments and
fittings.
Approximate efficiency (%)
Types of termination FC IWRC
Socket (spelter or resin) 100 100
Swaged socket n.r. 100
Spliced sleeve 90–92 90–95
Loop thimble/hand splice 80–90 80–90
Wedge sockets 75–80 75–80
Clips 80 80
Source: Wire Rope Technical Board (1993).
n.r. ¼ not recommended.
as follows: iron rope 0.05% to 0.15%, traction steel
0.20% to 0.50%, mild plow steel 0.40% to 0.65%,
plow steel 0.65% to 0.80%, and improved plow
steel 0.70% to 0.85% (American Society for Metals
1948). These typical ranges are not an industry-
accepted requirement, but the carbon content must
be sufficiently high to achieve the necessary strength
by cold working. Low-strength ropes are in very
limited use. Ropes for static and dynamic service are
not manufactured from different wire grades.
The stronger grades evolved from better steel
making, cleaner steels, better wire drawing practice,
and other advancements. The strongest steel wires are
drawn to strengths greater than 1700 MPa (247 ksi).
Zinc or zinc alloy galvanizing, which can be hot-
dipped or electrodeposited, reduces the strength
rating of a steel rope since the steel cross-sectional
area is reduced. Specially drawn galvanized ropes can
be ordered with full steel wire diameters to avoid this
strength reduction.
Alternate materials with superior corrosion resis-
tance were developed for special applications. Stain-
less steel is the predominant alternate material
available in rope and cable. The alloys typically used
are X10CrNi18-8 or X5CrNi18-10 (US Types 302 or
304). High-strength stainless steel cables are in
substantial use in aircraft controls. Stainless steel
ropes have lower strengths and greater constructional
stretch than regular steel, but can be used in severe
environments such as pickling lines. Wire ropes are
also made from phosphor bronze, Monel, and other
specialty materials. Plastic coating and/or impregna-
tion are used to achieve additional corrosion resis-
tance. Stranded aluminum rope with a reinforcing
steel IWRC is used for power transmission lines.
5. Degradation and Fracture
Like any machine, factors of installation, use, and
maintenance will affect the useful life of a wire rope.

Wire ropes degrade in service, through the often-
synergistic processes of wear, corrosion, and fracture.
The rate of degradation is dependent upon the
severity of the service environment and the loading
conditions. Degradation and fracture result in a loss
in breaking strength (LBS) up to the point of
catastrophic failure. Degradation can be loosely
categorized as rope damage, corrosion, wear, and
fracture.
5.1 Rope Damage and Defects
A large variety of damage and defects can occur in wire
ropes, through normal service, improper use, and
abuse. Permanent bends in rope are identified as kinks
and doglegs and are usually related to improper
handling. Strand separation known as ‘‘bird-caging’’
and exposure of the fiber core known as a ‘‘popped
core’’ are acceleration- or deceleration-related defects.
Damage can also include pinching, crushing, high-
temperature exposure, electrical arcing, lightning
strikes, and contamination. All of these alterations
can be of a severity to suggest immediate removal from
service, as they tend to concentrate applied stresses.
Individual wire damage can also be very severe.
5.2 Corrosion
Corrosion can occur to wire ropes used in nearly all
environments. Unfortunately, it is not possible to
accurately predict the remaining mechanical strength
of a corroded wire rope. General corrosion results in
a uniform attack, degrading the rope at a somewhat
predictable rate. Localized pitting attack is more
severe, as it is usually more rapid and unpredictable.
Wire cracking can also result from corrosion, in the
forms of stress corrosion cracking (SCC) in static
service, and corrosion fatigue in dynamic service.
In some cases active ropes corrode at a slower rate
than static ones, as bending may dislodge brittle
corrosion products. Corrosion products, which are
primarily oxides, act as abrasive particles, increasing
internal wear. Severely corroded or ‘‘rust-bound’’
ropes creak upon bending and have reduced flexi-
bility due to the volumetric expansion that accom-
panies corrosion processes.
In steel ropes the lubricant inhibits corrosion by
coating the wires and plastically filling the interwire
voids, physically preventing the ingress of moisture
and corrodants. However, steel wires are prone to
corrosion due to moisture, salts, and acids, even when
properly lubricated. Galvanized steel ropes afford
better resistance to corrosion. In normal environ-
ments, zinc forms a protective film of corrosion
product which thereafter corrodes more slowly than
steel. Additionally, when disruptions or holidays
in the plating occur, zinc provides galvanic protec-
tion and acts as a sacrificial anode since it is
Wire Ropes
electropositive to steel. Polymeric coatings are also
available for wire ropes. Corrosion resistant ropes,
such as stainless steel, are suitable for a broader range
of industrial environments. Fiber cores store lubri-
cant, but they can also act as a trap for moisture
and corrosive compounds. Fiber cores can also be
degraded by fungus.
5.3 Wear
Wear damage is an expected occurrence in most
dynamic rope applications. Abrasive wear damage to
the outer wires is very common, and is usually due to
overloading, winding mistakes, and abrasive materi-
als. Minor wear consists of polishing wear and
flattening of the outer wires. Abraded wires can
exhibit microstructural alteration and severe surface
roughening.
5.4 Fracture
Fracture in wire ropes is usually due to overload
failure or fatigue. Overload fracture in wire ropes is
almost exclusively ductile, with microvoid coales-
cence as the fracture mechanism. Even in cases of
shock loading, normal steel wires will fracture in a
cup-and-cone manner instead of the more brittle
behavior encouraged by faster strain rates. Due to the
homogeneous distribution of forces in a wire rope,
ductile rupture of individual wires is uncommon.
Ductile fracture typically occurs to complete strands
at different locations or to the entire rope at a single
location.
Fatigue fracture is very prevalent in wire ropes and
it most often occurs at stress levels below the yield
strength. Conservative design using safety factors will
usually prevent predictable overload failure, but
fatigue resistant design is more problematic. Dis-
tributed or localized wire fractures increase the
proportion of the load on the remaining wires. Ropes
with smaller wires are less affected by the fracture of
a single wire. Larger wires are weaker and are more
likely to have detrimental flaws. Wire breaks from
fatigue occur at the outer wires, in damaged valleys
between strands and also within wire cores, depend-
ing on the nature of service.
Occasional wire breaks, in general, do not sig-
nificantly affect the performance of long wire ropes.
The inherent friction between wires enables a broken
wire to reaccommodate its proportion of the total
load in a relatively short distance from the break.
The effectively weakened length of rope surrounding
a wire break can be mathematically estimated, and
this length may only be slightly greater than the
pitch or lay length (Costello 1997). It should be noted
that it is not unusual to have evidence of damage,
corrosion, wear, fatigue, and overload on a single
failed wire rope.
7
Wire Ropes
6. Inspection
Due to the myriad potential degradation phenomena,
wire ropes cannot be considered permanent pieces of
machinery. Economic factors dictate that prudent
and frequent inspection of wire ropes be performed
so that maximum service life may be attained prior to
costly, and possibly inconvenient, replacement. It is
often recommended that retired wire ropes be
destroyed or cut into unusable short lengths to
prevent inadvertent reuse.
Critical rope locations, such as attachments, regular
sheave stopping points, and drum crossovers, may
require special scrutiny. Sometimes inactive portions
of rope lengths are not subjected to inspection. The
inspection frequency and formality of documentation
is dictated by the severity of service. Records can be
evaluated to discern any changes in the rate of
degradation that may suggest that the inspection
frequency should be changed.
6.1 Visual Inspection
Visual inspection is the simplest and most often
performed nondestructive examination (NDE) meth-
od employed for wire ropes. With training, operators
or inspectors can identify damage and make judg-
ments about rope replacement. Visual examination
can detect abrasion, crushing, corrosion, broken
wires, kinks, pinching, and strand nicking. Operators
are sometimes required to perform visual examina-
tion daily or at a scheduled frequency.
Unfortunately, visual inspection can only include
the exterior strands. Core damage may be invisible,
including IWRC or WSC fatigue cracking, internal
corrosion attack, insufficient lubrication, and other
potentially serious types of degradation. Excess
lubricant may obfuscate strand nicking or other
damage. Wire breaks inside fittings are often un-
detectable. The visual inspection of uniform wear is
problematic, and the extent of material removal is a
subjective determination.
6.2 Other NDE Methods
Various electromagnetic examination methods have
been developed specifically for in situ assessment of
wire ropes, such as in mine hoists, at speeds up to
122 m (400 ft) min1 (Poffenroth 1996). The char-
acteristics measured by these methods are a loss in
metallic area (LMA) and local flaws (LF). Loss in
metallic area is distributed damage, such as corrosion
and abrasion, whereas local flaws or faults are broken
wires, damaged wires, or corrosion pits. These tests
are only suitable for steel wire ropes, due to the
ferromagnetic character required. The methods are
similar in the necessity to create a suitable magnetic
field in the rope, as residual fields are insufficiently
8
strong or homogeneous. The methods have been
utilized successfully for many years, and are specified
in standards such as ASTM E 1571.
The three principal NDE equipment types are:
(1) electromagnetic instruments, (2) direct current
and permanent magnet method instruments, and
(3) magnetic flux leakage instruments. Electromagnetic
instruments use the suspect wire rope as the core of a
transformer. The rope exhibits changes in magnetic
character when acted upon by an encircling primary
(exciter) coil. A secondary (search) coil measures the
variation in the metallic area by voltage changes.
Direct current and permanent magnet method
instruments induce a constant flux in the tested wire
rope within a test head using direct current or
permanent magnets. Another device measures the
absolute axial magnitude of the magnetic flux,
estimating the local cross-sectional area of the rope.
Magnetic flux leakage instruments also use a direct
current or permanent magnet instrument to create a
constant flux in the test rope. The detector sensor or
coil quantifies the flux leakage to identify the number
of LF such as wire discontinuities. Magnetic flux
leakage instruments are often dual function, obtain-
ing simultaneous LMA and LF data to provide a
better estimate of rope condition.
Electromagnetic equipment is generally standar-
dized on a known good section of the same rope
grade, or the rope in question. Calibration may also
require a reference standard with artificial flaws, to
verify sensitivity. These methods have some disad-
vantages, however, including the expense of the
equipment and substantial operator training. Elec-
tromagnetic methods are somewhat insensitive to
interior flaws, metallurgical alteration, and fatigue
cracks without separation (ASTM E 1571 2001).
6.3 Inspection Criteria
The results of inspection can be used to prepare an
estimate of the LBS, using LMA, LF, and visual
inspection results. When the LBS estimate exceeds
specifications, the rope is retired. In most applica-
tions, however, the user does not have sufficient
experience and training to estimate the LBS. Alter-
natively, direct visual or electromagnetic rejection
criteria are usually applied according to specific
industry standards, without actual LBS calculation.
Visual inspection criteria are typically based upon
the number of broken wires in the worst rope lay or a
length equivalent to some multiple of the rope
diameter. Abrasive wear criteria very often include a
maximum of 13 outer wire removal. LMA rejection
criteria are typically expressed as percentages of cross-
sectional area that has been subtracted by degrada-
tion. In some cases this criterion is 10% maximum
reduction (Wire Rope Technical Board 1993).
Rejection criteria and inspection frequency are
generally specified by application, as historical

experience has shown varying damage tolerance
levels for specific rope constructions and service
conditions. Proper inspection is often a governmental
mandate in dangerous applications where fatalities
may result from wire rope failure.
7. Failure Analysis
The investigation of failed wire ropes is an important
part of future failure prevention. These engineering
investigations are not always straightforward, as
many service factors can be contributory and many
postfracture conditions can be confusing (Miller
2000). If the nature and cause of a failure are not
determined, decisions on rope replacement or sub-
stitution may be arbitrary or potentially dangerous.
The engineering investigation of a failed wire rope
includes evaluation of the rope service. The loading,
sheaves and attachments, environment, and all other
potentially contributory extrinsic variables must be
qualified, or quantified wherever possible. Computer
simulation and failure recreation may confirm a
mechanical failure hypothesis. Systematic metallurgi-
cal failure investigation is often necessary to identify
the causes of a wire rope failure. To a large extent,
failure analysis is a reverse analog of the material
selection process (Miller 2002). Destructive physical
analysis typically includes visual examination, dimen-
sional evaluation, chemical analysis, mechanical
testing, scanning electron microscope (SEM) fracto-
graphy, microhardness testing, and metallography.
Thorough visual examination should assess the
state of the rope, at the failure location and
surrounding regions. The fractured ends of a wire
rope often exhibit important telltale features from
overloading, fatigue, or abuse. Individual wires that
failed via fatigue are characteristically flat, whereas
ductile overload results in necked, cup-and-cone
fractures. Abrasion fractures are usually angular
and shear fractures are usually flat. It is quite
common for wire breaks of many types in a single
failure: abrasive wear followed by fatigue, corrosive
thinning followed by ductile overload, and so on. It is
also not unusual for outer strands and outer strand
wires to separate by differing mechanism(s) than the
core or internal wires.
8. Concluding Remarks
This article is an overview and is not intended to be
exhaustive. It does not provide the level of requisite
Wire Ropes
information to select, maintain, inspect, or analyze
wire ropes. It is essential that additional information
be referenced regarding legal requirements for
regulated and nonregulated types of service. Wire
rope manufacturers, suppliers, and their organiza-
tions are often good sources for information
on properties and can provide historical data on
which ropes are recommended for different types
of service.
Bibliography
American Society for Metals 1948 Metals Handbook, 1948 edn.
ASM, Cleveland, OH
ASTM A 931-02 2002 Standard Test Method for Tension
Testing of Wire Ropes and Strand. ASTM International, West
Conshohocken, PA, USA
ASTM A 1023-02 2002 Standard Specification for Stranded
Carbon Steel Wire Ropes for General Purposes. ASTM
International, West Conshohocken, PA, USA
ASTM E 1571-01 2001 Standard Practice for Electromagnetic
Examination of Ferromagnetic Steel Wire Rope. ASTM
International, West Conshohocken, PA, USA
Chaplin C R 1995 Failure mechanisms in wire rope. J. Eng.
Failure Analysis 2 Mar. 1995, 45–57
Costello G 1997 Theory of Wire Rope, 2nd edn. Springer,
New York
Federal Specification RR-W-410E (USA) 2002 Wire Rope
and Strand. Defense Supply Center, Richmond, VA,
USA
ISO 3108 1974 Steel Wire Ropes for General Purposes—
Determination of Actual Breaking Load. International Orga-
nization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland
ISO 2408 1985 Steel Wire Ropes for General Purposes—
Characteristics. International Organization for Standardiza-
tion, Geneva, Switzerland
Jamieson F L 1987 Failures of lifting equipment. In:
Failure Analysis and Prevention, ASM Handbook 9th
edn. ASM International, Metals Park, OH, Vol. 11,
pp. 514–28
Miller B A 2000 Failure analysis of wire rope. Advanced
Materials and Processes. ASM International, Metals Park,
OH, USA Vol. 157, pp. 43–6
Miller B A 2002 Materials selection for failure prevention.
In: Becker W T, Shipley R J (eds.) Failure Analysis and
Prevention, ASM Handbook. ASM International, Metals
Park, OH, Vol. 11, pp. 24–39
Naumann F K 1983 Failure Analysis Case Histories and
Methodology. Dr. Riederer-Verlag GmbH, Stuttgart
Poffenroth D 1996 Nondestructive testing of elevator suspen-
sion and governor ropes, Elevator World, pp. 73–5
Wire Rope Technical Board (USA) 1993 Wire Rope Users
Manual, 3rd edn.
B. A. Miller
9
Wire Ropes

Copyright r 2004 Elsevier Ltd.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in any retrieval system or transmitted
in any form or by any means: electronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape, mechanical, photocopying, recording or
otherwise, without permission in writing from the publishers.
Encyclopedia of Materials: Science and Technology
ISBN: 0-08-043152-6
pp. 1–10

10