The present invention relates to a method for determining the car mass or weight in an elevator, and, as far as the elevator also comprises a counterweight also the weight of the counterweight.
Often, particularly during the modernization of existing elevators and elevator groups, a new elevator motor and motor drive is installed in an existing elevator. For the optimization of the new motor drive and elevator motor to the existing elevator system, it is preferable to know the weight of the elevator car and the counterweight in the elevator system.
Usually, the weight of a counterweight corresponds to the weight of the empty elevator car plus the half of the nominal load of the elevator. As often during the lifetime of an elevator, several modifications are made at the elevator car and also at the counterweight the real values often deviate essentially from the above assumptive theoretical values. Sometimes there are information plates at the elevator components with the properties of the elevator component as e.g. the weight. But as mentioned above, the weight may have been modified during the operating time of the elevator. The weighing of the elevator components, i.e. the weighing of the elevator car and the counterweight are laborious tasks which would need essential effort and costs. A method for retrieving a balance check in an elevator system is known from EP 2 774 885 B2.
It is therefore aim of the present invention to provide a method that allows to determine the weight of an elevator car and that of a counterweight, particularly in an existing system which is to be modernized. As shown in
The object is solved with a method as well as with an elevator system according to the independent claims. Preferred embodiments of the invention are subject matter of the dependent claims. Preferred embodiments of the invention are also described in the specification and drawings.
The present invention will become more fully understood from the detailed description given hereinbelow and the accompanying drawings which are given by way of illustration only, and thus are not limitative of the present invention, and wherein:
1. Calculations of the Elevator Hoisting System Balance
The invention is based preferably on a power model of an elevator as it is known from WO 2014/135408 A1 which is herewith made part of the present application. According to this document the elevator hoisting system balance mB, i.e. the weight difference between the weight of the car and counterweight can be expressed as follows:
mB=mcar−mcw (1.1)
When the elevator is running the power and energy supplied to the elevator motor is consumed in change of kinetic energy, potential energy as well as friction, copper and iron losses according to following formula 1.1.
Pm=PK+PP+PFr+PCu+PFe (1.2)
In formula (1.2) PM stands for motor electric power, PK for kinetic power, PP for potential power, PFr for friction losses, PCu for motor internal losses in the winding resistance and PFe motor internal iron losses.
During the constant speed state the acceleration is zero and kinetic power diminishes to zero (PK=mI·v·a=0). Copper losses can be calculated from the motor current IM and motor winding resistance RS, PCu=IM2·RS, and subtracted from the motor input power.
Under these conditions the remaining powers will be the potential power, friction and iron losses as they are shown in
Thus, during the constant speed travel the motor power with the removal of copper losses motor power simplifies to
Pm−PCu=PME=PP+PFr+PFe (1.3)
Frictions (guide shoe, rope bending, bearing and wind) are in practice independent of the running direction, PFr.up=PFr.dn=PFr. Iron losses are function of speed and motor current, so they are sensitive to the running direction. However, as we see from the figure, their magnitude is much smaller than the kinetic power levels and the difference between the two running directions is even smaller. So preferably it is assumed that the iron losses are independent of the running direction PFe.up≈PFe.dn=PFe.
The mean power difference of the both running directions can be derived
mB=½((mean(PMEup)−mean(PMEdn))(gvtest)−1) (1.4)
Mean power difference means here the power difference in the middle of the travel length of the elevator car in the shaft. In (1.3) mB is the elevator system balance in kilograms in the middle of the shaft, vtest is the speed of the elevator during the test and g is the gravitational acceleration 9.81 m/s2.
In words this means that the drive unit or inverter can calculate the elevator system balance at the middle point of the shaft by calculating, during the constant speed, the average of motor current, from which the copper losses are removed, to both up and down directions, and dividing the difference with test velocity vtest and g.
Table 1 shows results of a test that was conducted to check the operation of the theory in practice with the example elevator. The correct balancing of the elevator is −300 kg.
It can be seen that it is needed to remove the copper losses from the motor supply power and the assumption of insignificance of iron losses is applicable. The balance value has negative sign as the counterweight is heavier than the car.
2. Calculation of the Hoisting System Friction
According to the invention the elevator shaft average friction over the round trip is calculated according to formula 2.1.
FμS=½((mean(pMEup)+mean(pMEdn))(vtest−1) (2.1)
The friction above accumulates three kind of frictions: friction of bearings at the test speed, rope bending friction and guide shoe friction. For example in low-rise elevators the bearing friction is a minor term of these three friction terms while the guide shoe sliding friction dominates the accumulated friction FμS. Thus this FμS friction can optionally be used to check an overall shaft alignment and lubrication condition of the elevator. As average value the arithmetic mean value is used. Anyway, other averages calculation methods that do not lead to essentially different values can be used.
3. Calculation of the Hoisting System Balance Shift
For a dynamic compensation of the hoisting system the unit mass [kg/m] of compensation ropes (umCR) should conform to the following equation:
umCR=R·umSR+½umTC (3.1)
with
umSR=unit mass of the hoisting ropes,
umTC=unit mass of the traveling cable
(unit mass=mass/length)
R is the roping ratio, e.g. 1:1, 2:1 or 4:1. If formula (3.1) applies, the hoisting system maintains its balance throughout the entire travel from bottom to top floor. If not, the compensation error or balance shift ΔB [kg/m] is to be calculated from (3.2) as
ΔB=umCR−R·umSR−½umTC (3.2)
To calculate this balance shift ΔB (or hoisting system compensation) according to formula (3.2) the data from constant speed regions of test round trip is needed as mentioned above. According to a preferred embodiment of the invention the hoisting system compensation ΔB can advantageously be calculated from the constant speed data with linear regression, for example as follows:
The variance var( ) and covariance cov( ) can be calculated as one-pass algorithms in a per-se known manner.
4. Calculation of the Total Moving Effective Inertia Mass
Thus, the total moving inertia mass mI [kg] of the elevator hoisting system is calculated as
Where a, v, h and PME are the acceleration, velocity and actual height position, which parameters are measured when the elevator is accelerating or decelerating at a constant rate (jerk=0). The parameter C is a constant which according to the elevator design, roping ratio etc. . . . differs between 2/5 and 4/5, but preferably has the value of 2/3 for traction sheave elevators with a counterweight and a roping ratio between 1:1 and 1:4. The term B(h) is the balance shift of the hoisting system during the test run
B(h)=ΔB(h−½hnom) (4.2)
with h being the actual position of the elevator and hnom being the nominal travel length of the elevator car (or counterweight in case of identical rope ratios) in the shaft.
Accordingly it is possible to obtain the moving inertia mass without any complicated weight measurements in the elevator shaft.
5. Calculation of the Car and Counterweight Mass
The system inertia mass mI comprises the inertia mass of all moving components, i.e. the linear moving components and the rotating components. The inertia mass Ic of linearly moving masses depends on the roping ratio R and the location and role of the component in the hoisting system
Ic=Kmc (5.1)
where mc is the mass of a linear moving component of the elevator and K is a factor which is specified for different components and different roping ratios. The table below specifies some values for a common roping ration of 2:1.
The inertia moment Jc of rotating components is preferably transformed in their linear corresponding value Ic by following equation:
Ic=K2Jc/rc2 (5.2)
where rc is the radius of the motor traction sheave or pulley (where ropes touch) and K is a factor depending on the elevator component and roping ratio, e.g. as specified below.
The following table gives exemplary values for the variable K of an elevator with a 2:1 roping, i.e. R=2.
Now the car and counterweight masses can be calculated from
mcar=½(mI+mB−Σi·I·ci) (5.3)
mcwt=½(mI−mB−Σi·I·ci) (5.4)
where Σi Ici is the sum of the masses of the relevant, preferably of all moving components i of the elevator system. The linear inertia mass of ropes is calculated based on travel and moving section of ropes, roping ratio, number of ropes and the unit mass of ropes. The inertia torque of each rotating component shall be taken from data sheets or from stored information in the elevator control or in a service tool, e.g. laptop a service technician and is then transformed to linear mass with equation (5.2).
In practice the calculation according to the formulas under section 5 can be preferably carried out in a terminal, e.g. laptop, which contains tables for inertia torques and rope masses and calculation rules for different elevator concepts to consider the roping ratio etc. . . . . Of course also these calculations can be performed in the elevator control, preferably in an electronic weight calculating unit thereof. This unit could be part of the elevator control, e.g. as elevator CPU software, particularly as the software could comprise stored information about the components the elevator is composed of.
6. Embodiment of the Inventive Mass Calculation Method
Hereinafter one example of the inventive determination of the car and counterweight mass is given. The parameters calculated in elevator control are mB [kg], mI [kg], ΔB [kg/m] and FμS [N]. The parameters which are calculated preferably in a separate mobile appliance, as e.g. a laptop of a technician are the weight of the car and counterweight mcar [kg] and mcwt [kg].
Technician runs a full end-to-end test round trip, drive software shall calculate from constant speed data (a=0 @ |vtest|)
Drive software of an electronic weight calculation unit of the elevator control shall calculate from constant acceleration/deceleration data (j=0 @|anom|)
The drive software shall pass the calculated parameters to a display as output means of the elevator control. A technician shall read of mB and mI from the display and enter them to laptop with a corresponding software, which computes the car and counterweight masses mcar and mcwt from equations (5.3) and (5.4). In the app the technician chooses a correct elevator configuration and design as, machinery, rope types, pulleys, travelling cables etc. in order to obtain Σi Ici in equations (5.3) and (5.4). Preferably, in his app the technician also retrieves the correct variable K for calculating the moving inertia masses according to equations 5.1 and 5.2.
The weight of the car and counterweight are then displayed on the laptop display. The parameters can also be transmitted from the elevator control to the laptop via an interface or via a mobile data storage, e.g. flash memory. This reduces the danger of input errors by the service technician.
When designing the algorithms presented above special attention has been paid on to keep the equations computationally as simple as possible to enable easy implementation.
Following terms are used in this application as a synonyms:
This application is a Continuation of PCT International Application No. PCT/EP2017/052683, filed on Feb. 8, 2017, which is hereby expressly incorporated by reference into the present application.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
7971688 | Perala | Jul 2011 | B2 |
20100276230 | Peräläet al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20150019182 | Tyni | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150142339 | Liu | May 2015 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2020462252 | Mar 2023 | AU |
104803246 | Jul 2015 | CN |
105008260 | Oct 2015 | CN |
110234587 | Sep 2019 | CN |
110234587 | Dec 2021 | CN |
2774885 | Sep 2014 | EP |
WO 2013113862 | Aug 2013 | WO |
WO 2014135408 | Sep 2014 | WO |
WO-2018145734 | Aug 2018 | WO |
Entry |
---|
International Search Report issued in PCT/EP2017/052683 (PCT/ISA/210), dated Jan. 3, 2018. |
Tyni et al., “Electric Site Survey—On Quest of Elevator Parameters”, Elevator Technology 19, Proceeding of ELEVCON 2012, May 24, 2012, pp. 1-13. |
Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority issued in PCT/EP2017/052683 (PCT/ISA/237), dated Jan. 3, 2018. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20190330016 A1 | Oct 2019 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | PCT/EP2017/052683 | Feb 2017 | WO |
Child | 16503877 | US |