See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/280239942

Rolling Resistance study of gravelly sand

material on laboratory scale

Conference Paper March 2009

CITATIONS READS

2 49

5 authors, including:

n.p Widodo Soeseno Kramadibrata

Bandung Institute of Technology Bandung Institute of Technology
21 PUBLICATIONS 41 CITATIONS 32 PUBLICATIONS 47 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Yudhidya Wicaksana
Seoul National University
12 PUBLICATIONS 5 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Rock cutting performance in dynamic approach View project

Mining and Petrolem Projeject View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Yudhidya Wicaksana on 22 July 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 ROLLING RESISTANCE STUDY OF GRAVELLY SAND MATERIAL
ON LABORATORY SCALE
Nuhindro Priagung WIDODO, Suseno KRAMADIBRATA, Abdul ROHMAN,
Yudhidya WICAKSANA, Fajar HERMAWAN
Mining Engineering, Faculty of Mining and Petroleum Engineering,
Institut Teknologi Bandung, Bandung 40132, Indonesia Indonesia

ABSTRACT
Rolling resistance (RR) which is defined as an opposite force against wheel move direction is one of important
factors of hauling equipment productivity. In practice and calculation, a Rolling Resistance Coefficient (RRC) is a
term commonly used and defined as the value of the rolling resistance force divided by the wheel load. The RRC
depends on several factors, such as: inflation pressure, contact area to the road surface, tire types, equipment
velocity, and the physical & mechanical properties of road material. A study to determine the RRC and to observe
the RR parameters on compacted gravelly sand was carried out in laboratory scale using four wheel lorry rolled on
a track model. The force to move the lorry was measured and subsequently processed by using equilibrium force
equation. The results show that RRC on compacted gravelly sand ranges from 0.10 to 0.155 depending on the
operating conditions. The empirical equation of compacted gravelly sand ground for 0% grade is as follow

, and for 8% grade, the equation becomes .

INTRODUCTION
In mining operation, truck production depends on the size of equipment and the cycle time. The cycle time is a total
time required by the truck in transporting material from a loading to a dumping points and one of the influence
factors is related with the resistance that should be overcome by the truck that is grade resistance and RR. Grade
resistance value can be calculated directly from the grade of hauling road, whereas the RR value is determined from
direct measurements as it is resulted from an interaction process of tire and ground when the tire rolling.

A number of previous investigators have conducted studies related to RR and RRC. At the beginning of the 20th
century, Gerstner and Bernstein (1913) studied the phenomenon of a rigid wheel rolling on deformable soil, they
found that the force (Ft = RR) to tow a rigid wheel can be expressed as:

(1)

Where Q is the load, c is a soil constant, R is the radius and B is the width of the wheel.
Brenstein subsequently set up another similar formula as follows,

(2)

From these relationships, it can be interpreted that the force needed (RR) is the function of load on the wheel,
physical and mechanical properties of the ground, and tire dimension. For inflated tire, another expression of tire
parameters is needed. According to Hans Bendtsen (2004), the losses of rolled inflated tire consist of: the losses of
macro deformation of tire, the losses of micro deformation of the ground, and the losses due to slippage friction on
the contact area of tire and ground.

In order to observe RRC values of typical road materials, particularly in Indonesian coal mines, it is worth to
conduct study by taking account the typical road material in the mine and at various operating conditions.
Supposedly, the measurement of RR should be conducted at the real scale, but due to practical reasons, study of RRC
in laboratory scale could then be justified (Kramadibrata et. al., 2002). This study aims to determine the RRC of
compacted gravelly sand and the relationships of related parameters.

BACKGROUND THEORY ON ROLLING RESISTACE

Rolling resistance is defined as an opposite force against wheel move direction (Wong, 1993), which is linearly
influenced by payload as it is given in Equation (3),

(3)

Where, RR is a rolling resistance (N), WN is the payload (N), RRC is the rolling resistance coefficient (0.015 hard
surface, and 0.02 0.1 for soil).

According to Taborek (1975), the effect of various surfaces on RR for different type of cars varies (see Table 1).

Table 1. Coefficient of rolling resistance for various tire and surface (Taborek, 1975)
Tire type Surface

Concrete Medium Hard Soil Sand

Passenger car 0.015 0.08 0.30

Truck 0.011 0.06 0.25

Tractor 0.020 0.04 0.20

Kramadibrata et.al. (2002) which conducted research on dried silt and wet silt found that the RRC of those materials
being between 0.017 and 0.29. Based on the relationship between RRC and total weight, it can be said that the RRC
increases as the total weight increases. On the other hand, relationship between RRC and inflation pressure shows
that an increase of inflation pressure causes the RRC gets smaller.

EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
Rolling resistance experiments were conducted at the Geomechanics and Mining Equipment laboratory, Faculty of
Mining and Petroleum Engineering of ITB, Indonesia. The experimental devices mainly consist of: track filled with
gravelly sand material and silt one after another, four wheel lorry, winch machine with wire rope and sets of pulley,
and load cells as the force measurement devices (Figure 1).
 Tension Load
cell (#1)
Winch machine Wire rope
W
Ft
Track (compacted gravelly sand ground)

RR RR d = 17 cm
Compression
Load cell (#2) L = 13 m

Figure 1.The schematic of Rolling Resistance measurements at laboratory scale

A winch used in this experiment is driven by an electrical motor of 7.5 kW and 1440 rpm. The empty weight and
volume capacity of the lorry are 100 kg and 0.6 m3 respectively, and the lorry is wheeled up by four tires of Vespa
Sprint radial ply type, with diameter and width of 43 cm and 9 cm, respectively. The track simulation is laid on a
steel bridge and designed for 13 m long enabling the bridge be adjusted to the grade up to 8%. Wooden planks are
secured to the bridge at both sides to prevent of the dry silt and wet silt from spilling out the track.

The lorry is towed on the track by wire rope with diameter of 8.8mm. The wire rope is laid and arranged through
pulleys and rollers as shown in Figure 1. Although the friction occurring between wire rope and pulley as well as
roller is considered low this is still taken into account. Towing forces are obtained from a 5 kN tension load cell
(location #1) reading as well as compression load cell 300 kN (location #2). These two load cells were needed to
cross checking the result. Calibration of the two load cells was carried out, and the results show that the force is
identical with no correction factor (see Figure 2). In the experiment, towing forces were read from both load cells;
moreover the final data is an average of those recorded data.

Experimental design of the rolling resistance test is given in Table 2, and there are four variables applied in the
experimentation namely, speed (0.65 m/s and 1.1 m/s), grade (0% and 8%), inflation pressure (103 kPa, 207 kPa,
and 310 kPa) and total load (100 kg, 200 kg, 300 kg, and 400 kg).

Table 2. Experimental design

Towing speed Grade Tire inflation pressure Total load (kg)

(m/s) (%) (kPa) psi 100 200 300 400

0.65; 1.1 0; 8 103.42; 206.84; 310.26 15; 30; 45

 1.0

Grade = 0%
Grade = 8%
0.8

F load cell #2
0.6
Grade 8%, y = 0.98x
R = 0.9

0.4
Grade 0%, y = 0.96x
R = 0.9

0.2

0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
F load cell #1

Figure 2.Load cell position #1 and position #2 measurement data

The physical and mechanical properties of the track material is shown in Table 3. The compacted gravelly sand has
CBR value of 11.3% 18.8% which can be categorized as fair to good subgrade, (Kaufman and Ault, 1977). The
simulation track also considers the minimum width of track and failure conditions related to the bearing capacity of
material. Using Terzaghi equation of bearing capacity (Das, 1985), it is estimated that impacted area due to the tire
load is about 0.75 m and ultimate pressure is about 54.7 t/m2 = 540.7 kPa, which is in the range of track and
simulation condition (width of track is 1.5 m and pressure due to the total load is 36.5 kPa 103.1 kPa).

Table 3. Physical and mechanical properties of gravelly sand

Properties Value Properties Value

Natural density (gr/cm3) 1.78 Internal friction angle (degree) 35

3
Dry density (gr/cm ) 1.52 Cohesion (kPa) 7.02

Water content (%) 17.64 California Bearing Ratio (CBR) (%) 11.3 - 18.8

Sand = 49%, Gravel = 36%,

Composition
Porosity (%) 33.51 Silt = 15%

Note: The California Bearing Ratio test is penetration test meant for the evaluation of subgrade strength of roads and pavements.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The RRC of gravelly sand material are calculated from RR (towing forces) divided by total load applied. The results
for simulated condition are shown in Table 4. It is shown that RRC varies according depending upon the physical
and mechanical parameters of the track materials.
 Table 4. Experimental results
Tire inflation Rolling Resistance Coefficient (RRC)
Total Load
pressure v = 0.65 m/s v = 1.1 m/s
(kN)
(kPa) (Psi) Grade = 0% Grade = 8% Grade = 0% Grade = 8%

103.42 15 0.110 0.114 0.111 0.116

1 206.84 30 0.109 0.115 0.109 0.118

310.26 45 0.104 0.106 0.106 0.108

103.42 15 0.117 0.120 0.123 0.125

2 206.84 30 0.115 0.123 0.121 0.126

310.26 45 0.111 0.113 0.114 0.114

103.42 15 0.132 0.136 0.135 0.137

3 206.84 30 0.126 0.128 0.128 0.129

310.26 45 0.119 0.122 0.122 0.125

103.42 15 0.145 0.150 0.149 0.153

4 206.84 30 0.132 0.133 0.138 0.139

310.26 45 0.125 0.127 0.129 0.127

In order to evaluate relationships of each parameter, RRC values for each experimentation condition have been
plotted against the total load (see Figure 3a and 3b). It can be seen that for constant velocity and constant pressure,
RRC increases as total load increase. This is might have been attributed to the tire deflection, due to the fact that as
vertical load increases the tire contact area get also larger and creating the rolling resistance higher. Tire deflection
effect is also shown in the increasing of RRC when inflated pressure decreases.

Figures 3a and 3b indicates that relatively higher RRC values are observed at grade 8% than that of at grade 0% and
this should have been possible because of contact area differences, that the area being smaller at the lower grade. It
is also shown in Figure 3 that velocity has an effect to the RRC, indicating high RRC at velocity of 1.1 m/s than that
of 0.65 m/s. However, the velocity factor to the RRC is difficult to be analyzed in this study because mechanical
losses of moving parts may give an influence to the towing forces when lorry moves in different velocity.

Relationships of total load, inflation pressure, contact area, and grade to determine rolling resistance of gravelly
sand in the range of this research have been evaluated by dimensional analysis. The result shows different empirical

equations for 0% and 8% track grades. For 0% grade, the equation is , while for 8% grade,

the equation becomes ,

Where, RR is a rolling resistance (N), W is a total load (N), P is the tire inflation pressure (Pa), A is a contact area
(m2), and G is a road grade (%).
Figure 4 shows that empirical equations on 0% and 8% grades have good correlation with the measured data. Both
equations also have identical parameter and constants.

Grade = 0 %
0.16
0.65 m/s, 15 psi

0.15 1.1 m/s, 30 psi

y = 0.026ln(x) + 0.11
0.65 m/s, 30 psi 1.1m/s, 15 psi
y = 0.024ln(x) + 0.11
1.1 m/s, 45 psi
0.14
0.65 m/s, 15 psi
0.65 m/s, 45 psi y = 0.019ln(x) + 0.11
1.1 m/s, 30 psi
y = 0.016ln(x) + 0.11
RRC

0.13 0.65 m/s, 30 psi

y = 0.015ln(x) + 0.10
1.1 m/s, 45 psi
y = 0.015ln(x) + 0.10
0.12 0.65 m/s, 45 psi

0.11

0.10
1 2 3 4 5

Total Load (kN)

(a) Grade 0%

Grade = 8 %
0.16

1.1 m/s, 15 psi

0.15 0.65 m/s, 15 psi

y = 0.025ln(x) + 0.11
1.1 m/s, 30 psi 1.1 m/s, 15 psi
y = 0.025ln(x) + 0.11
0.6 5m/s, 30 psi
0.65 m/s, 15 psi
0.14 1.1 m/s, 45 psi
0.65 m/s, 45 psi 1.1 m/s, 30 psi y = 0.013ln(x) + 0.12
y = 0.012ln(x) + 0.11
0.65 m/s, 30 psi
RRC

0.13
y = 0.014ln(x) + 0.11
1.1 m/s, 45 psi
y = 0.015ln(x) + 0.10
0.65 m/s, 45 psi
0.12

0.11

0.10
1 2 3 4 5
Total Load (kN)

(a) Grade 8%

Figure 3. Rolling resistance measurement at (a) grade 0% and (b) grade 8%

CONCLUDING REMARKS
Rolling resistance study at laboratory scale on compacted gravelly sand material has been carried out. The rolling
resistance coefficient resulted from the measurement is 0.10 to 0.155, and if it is compared to the results of Taborek
(1975), those results are in the range of Medium Hard Soil to Sand materials. The present results also in good
agreement with the results of Kramadibrata et.al. (2002).

Empirical equations developed shows that rolling resistance is function of total load, tire inflation pressure, contact
area, and road grade; and those are in good agreement with the data measured. However, it is still difficult to
extrapolate the equations for higher load and different tire inflation pressure. Further measurement is then required
to check the empirical relationships for higher load and ground conditions in mine site.

700.0

Grade = 0% y = 0.9x + 12.3

600.0
R = 0.9
Grade = 8%

500.0 y = 0.9x + 23.2

R = 0.9
RR empirical (N)

400.0 0.24
W4.67
8%, = 0.116
P 0.5 G
300.0

0.17
6.96
200.0 0%, = 0.115

100.0

0.0
0.0 100.0 200.0 300.0 400.0 500.0 600.0 700.0

RR measurement (N)

Figure 4. Empirical equations plotted with the data measured

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Acknowledgements are presented to Mining Engineering Department of Institut Teknologi Bandung, Faculty of
Mining and Petroleum Engineering of Institut Teknologi Bandung, PT. Kaltim Prima Coal, and Ministry of
Education, Indonesia. Special thanks are also directed to Mr. Sudibyo, Mr. Syarif, Mr. Suparman, and Mr. Iwan as
the technicians at the Geomechanics Laboratory of ITB.
 REFERENCES
Bernstein, R., Probleme zur Experimentellen Motorpugmechanik, Der Motorwagen, 9:pp. 199206 (1913).
Das, B., Principles of Geotechnical Engineering, PWS Engineering Publishers (1985).
Hans Bendtsen, Rolling resistance, fuel consumption - a literature review, Danish Road InstituteTechnical note 23
(2004).
Kaufman, W.W., and Ault, J.C., Design of surface mine haulage roads, IC 8758, US Bureau of Mines, Washington
DC (1977).
Komandi, G., An evaluation of the concept of rolling resistance, Journal of Terramechanics 36, pp. 159166 (1999).
Kramadibrata, S., Rai, M.A., Simangunsong, G.M., Mulyana, C.Y., Laksana, G.S., Widodo, N.P., Matsui, K.,
Analysis of Rolling Resistance Coefficient of Dried Silt and Wet Silt at Laboratory Scale, Mine Planning and
Equipment Selection (2002).
Taborek, J.J., Mechanics of Vehicles, Machine Design (1975).
Wong, J.Y., Theory of Ground Vehicles, 2nd Edition, John Wiley and Sons, Inc, New York (1993).

View publication stats