Industrial Ropeway at Hetauda Cement Factory

GANESH KUMAR SINGH

HAULING STONES

Many industries use ropeways to transport raw materials to their production lines. In a cement factory a ropeway can be used to bring limestone from the quarry to the processing plant, which is one of the central activities in cement production. The cost of transporting limestone determines the cost of the cement produced, and, as a result, the commercial viability of a plant. Heavy-duty vehicles are also often used to transport stone. Though this practice has the advantage of flexibility, a large number of mechanics are needed because vehicles require regular maintenance to avoid breakdown. Furthermore, transport by trucks is expensive because they run on imported fuel. Shortages of fuels, which occur from time to time due to local, national and international causes, jeopardise their smooth operation.

A ropeway is a reliable system for moving stones. Though a ropeway runs on expensive equipment requiring high initial capital investment, its maintenance and operational costs are less compared to those of trucks. Another advantage of a ropeway is that, except for high winds—which last for a short time anyway—unfavourable weather conditions, in particular the monsoon rains, do not affect its operation. Its effective operation is, however, critically dependent upon regular maintenance and immediate repair. Continuity is essential as even a brief stoppage in the provision of limestone can completely disrupt cement production.

For a cement factory, using an electric ropeway is a viable alternative to relying on trucks. A ropeway ensures a regular supply of stones and, in view of Nepal’s hydro­electricity potential, fits well into the local economy. The following sections describe some technical aspects of the ropeway used at the Hetauda Cement Factory; the technical details are provided in Annex B.

THE ROPEWAY SYSTEM

The Hetauda Cement Factory uses a bi-cable circulating ropeway system to bring stones from a quarry located 11 kilometres away (Figure 7.1). Usha Breco Ltd., an Indian company, constructed the ropeway, which can transport 150 tonnes of stones an hour from the silo at the quarry through the needle gate and the apron feeder and along the conveyor to the unloading station at the factory. Not only is a ropeway reliable, the cost of transporting a tonne of limestone by ropeway is Rs 61, thirty rupees less than transporting the same amount by truck. By using a ropeway the factory saves about two million rupees annually in stone transportation alone. The ropeway presents no major operational problems as long as the supply of electricity is uninterrupted.

The Hetauda Cement Factory Ropeway System has three major components: line equipment, a loading station and an unloading station.

Line equipment

The essential characteristic of this system is the use of two static overhead ropes on which carriers run. Each carrier has a hanger, from which a bucket is suspended. The hanger is attached to the hauling rope, which moves continuously in a loop. The wheels of the carrier enable it to ride over the track rope. The ropes are supported at a convenient height above the ground by means of trestles or towers spread out along the line. Each trestle is provided with oscillating saddles with grooves that support the track ropes and rollers that support the hauling rope. One track rope carries loaded buckets, while a second rope, whose diameter is smaller, carries empty buckets. Because the buckets carry loads from the quarry to the plant but return to the quarry empty, two different sizes of track ropes are used. The two track cables run parallel; the distance between them (the ropeway gauge) is four metres. The carriers grip the moving hauling rope along the entire line, they are detached only at the loading, divide and unloading stations, where they are removed from the track rope and moved onto fixed rails.

If the distance between the supporting structures is great, the tension in the track ropes is high. This situation often occurs when a tower cannot be located at a proper site or the ropeway crosses a wide valley. When spans are long, large and strong supports are provided and pressure-frame-cum-track-rope divide stations are installed. In these stations, a battery of rollers support the hauling rope. The track rope is supported either by the front or rear saddle of the pressure-frame-cum-track­rope divide station. It has to be anchored near the station entrance or exit either by

FIGURE 7.1:

Profile of ropeway from loading to unloading stations

Pressure

Loading frame

dead-weight or tension anchors. A tension of about 76 metric tonnes is provided on a loaded rope, whereas on the unloaded side the tension is maintained at a maximum of 33 metric tonnes. The track rope is divided into small lengths along the ropeway line to avoid high tension and the need for thick ropes. A frame called a pressure frame (PF) is used to take up the load. In addition to the PFs, the ropeway has track-rope divide (TRD) stations where track ropes on one side of the station can be tensioned using weights. There are three PFs (PF-1, PF-2 and PF-4) and three TRDs (TRD-3, TRD-5 and TRD-6) in the Hetauda Cement Factory Ropeway. There are fifty-seven trestles and one divide station. In all, there are nine stations. At each TRD and PF station, buckets move onto rails upon entering the station.

Each steel-latticed trestle has a cast saddle with grooves for supporting the track rope and providing for oscillation. When the line is empty of buckets, the hauling rope sags excessively; thus, two rollers are provided on each trestle to support it. V-shaped rods guide the hauling rope onto the rollers. A cathead is provided at the top of each trestle to allow for the lifting of the track ropes with suitable tackle while removing a saddle or hoisting a rope. Each tower supports seven wires at the top; they are used for telephoning, issuing commands, emergency control, standby operations, and to indicate faults at the unloading station. These wires help control and monitor ropeway operations. There are 164 bottom-discharge buckets with catch levers and chains for automatic tripping and self-latching. Each carriage has a bucket made of a steel frame, four wheels with nylon liners, and an automatic jaw-gripping device equipped with an operating lever to clamp it to the hauling rope.

Loading station

Once limestone is mined, it is crushed using heavy machines at the quarry. Then it is fed to a silo, from which it flows through a needle gate onto an apron feeder. The

FIGURE 7.2: Loading station at Hetauda Cement Factory (schematic)

Needle gateSilo

feeder, in turn, discharges the material onto a belt conveyor, which carries it to the loading station, where it is fed to the rotary distributor for loading into buckets (Figure 7.2).

The apron feeder and the belt conveyor are designed to transfer 360 tonnes of limestone per hour at peak capacity. The apron feeder has a variable speed drive arrangement to regulate the flow of limestone. The centre distance of the apron feeder is 3,658 millimetres. A 15-kW motor with a controlled eddy current, variable speed drive and a speed rating between 120 and 1200 rpm is used to drive the feeder. The belt conveyor has an independent drive provided by a 10-HP squirrel cage motor. The conveyor is equipped with a weighing arrangement to indicate the flow rate of the material.

A speed-sensing device controls the start and stop of the apron feeder motor. Unless the ropeway attains full speed, the apron feeder will not start. The ropeway takes nearly 90 seconds to accelerate to full speed, whereas the feeder motor accelerates instantly. This speed-sensing device is used to prevent the spillage of material on the floor of the station due to any inaccuracy in timing its transfer to the ropeway from the feeder.

The rotary distributor is divided into four compartments, each with an attached chute. The complete unit rotates in such a way that material is delivered to each compartment as it passes under the four discharge chutes. Each chute, in turn, feeds the material into a ropeway bucket, which is pushed around the station rail loop by an arm attached to the rotating distributor chute. The speed of the distributor is adjusted so that it will continuously deliver full buckets of material at the correct time interval. The distributor is driven by the driving sheave, so its speed is controlled by the speed of the ropeway.

A steel structure forms the rail support, which carries the buckets after they arrive at the station and are detached from the hauling rope. The speed of the buckets is reduced and finally stopped by an automatic spacer, which allows each bucket to enter the rotary distributor at the correct time interval. The spacer is guided by a trip mechanism operated by the distributor. The bucket is then loaded by the distributor and pushed automatically around the return loop onto the outgoing side. At this point the rail slopes in order to accelerate the buckets to the speed of the hauling rope under the control of the overhead chain retarder driven from the ropeway sheave. Each bucket is then attached to the hauling rope using a jaw-gripping mechanism before it passes out onto the line. Four rail switches are provided either for transferring buckets from the station rail to the parking rail, where the buckets can be repaired, inspected, or changed, or for loading new buckets from the parking rail to the station rail.

The main drive gear comprises a 240-kW, 1500-rpm DC motor, a drum-type coupling with a manual brake, a gear box, a geared coupling, a driving pinion, a fleeting sheave in a spherical roller bearing plumber blocks, and a thrust bearing. The sheave is driven by spurring fitted to the sheave rim. Also attached to the sheave rim is a brake ring. The hand brake is operated by weights. The drive sheave is mounted on a sheave frame and the complete drive gear unit is mounted on a fabricated bedplate fixed on a foundation.

Also present at the loading station is the hauling rope lubricator, which consists of a tank filled with oil and is equipped with a shut-off cork and rope lubricating brushes. The hauling rope is lubricated using a drip-feed system.

Unloading station components

A loaded bucket arriving at a station is transferred from the rope to the rail after passing over the entrance saddle bar. It continues through the unlocking frame, where its grip is automatically detached from the hauling rope. The bucket then decelerates under the control of the overhead chain haulage. It passes over the hopper, where it is emptied when the bucket-catch strikes the trip gear. Under the control of a chain retarder, the bucket then passes onto an accelerating grade into the locking frame, where it is re-attached to the hauling rope. It then passes over the exit saddle and saddle bar onto the return sidetrack rope. The unloading station has provisions for removing damaged buckets from the line and replacing them with good buckets.

Damaged buckets are kept in the parking rail for maintenance. Rail switches are operated manually and are used to put on or take off buckets. The unloading station also houses the hauling rope tension gear.

INSPECTION, REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE

To ensure its good performance, long life and smooth operation, it is necessary that the various parts of the ropeway system be inspected regularly and repaired if necessary. The track rope, hauling rope, carriers, tension equipment, and towers, as well as other equipment in the loading and unloading stations, should be inspected every three months or after 1,000 hours of operation. They should be cleaned, greased, and adjusted as required.

To lubricate the ropes there is a track-rope oiling car equipped with a special carriage which has an oil tank. As the car traverses the line, oil is fed onto the rope from the tank through pipes. A special car called an inspection car is used to inspect the ropes. The inspector sits inside the car, which is enclosed in wire mesh for his protection. The car is fitted with a collapsible ladder on which the inspector can stand when inspecting the rope.

Routine maintenance is necessary to ensure that bolts are tight and that steel parts missing from the towers, stations and pressure frame are replaced. To prevent corrosion, the structures are periodically painted. The alignment and level of the foundations of the structures are also regularly checked. The foundation material is likely to erode or sink in the monsoon, and the structures may tilt. The level of a trestle is important as its sinking may lead to serious damage or may cause the track rope to lift off the trestle. Insulators and overhead wires on the tower top are checked to ensure that they are in proper working condition. Damage to the wires, such as the fault and emergency wires in the unloading station, will prevent the ropeway from starting. An oiling and cleaning record is maintained for each station. A record of the cars, arranged in numerical order, is also kept to note the date on which each carrier was last oiled and serviced. The major areas requiring repair and maintenance are discussed below.

Track rope

To prevent the track rope from becoming dried out and rusty and to ensure that the rope is lubricated at all times, the oiling carrier must be sent out along the line at regular intervals. The exact interval depends on humidity, temperature, and other weather-related factors. The rope must be lubricated more often during the rainy season and must also be checked to ensure that there is no breakage. Both activities can be done from the inspection carrier. If a wire is broken, immediate remedial action must be taken, either by brazing the wires or by using a sleeve cover over the broken part. While carrying out repairs, care must be taken that there are no protrusions of wire which could cut into the nylon carriage wheels. Also, when the rope is lifted from a saddle onto a trestle, care must be taken so that the rope doesn’t kink.

Track rope tensioning

To replace the entire track rope or a section of it, the following procedure is adopted. The tackle is rigged at the dead end in order to lower the tension weight and the old rope is lowered to the ground. The new rope is pulled out over the ground, protecting it from obstacles using logs and rollers. The actual method of pulling depends on the availability of equipment. At the Hetauda Cement Factory a heavy bulldozer with tracks and a winch drive is usually used. It is necessary to position the reels along the line and to avoid pulling the entire length at once, a process which requires a very powerful winch.

Splicing

When it is necessary to splice the hauling rope, the first step is choosing a location for carrying out the work. Splicing can be done only on the ground. Any point along the line where the trestles are not very high and access is convenient can be chosen.

Carrier

The carriages are inspected every three months. They are cleaned, greased, and adjusted. All worn-out parts are replaced. A spare carrier replaces any damaged carrier on the line so that the ropeway can still operate while the damaged carrier is being repaired. The damaged carrier is repaired immediately and kept in a parking rail at a station as a spare. All castings are carefully examined for cracks, particularly if a carrier has fallen or derailed. Another potential problem is with the carriage unlocking rollers; if they are worn out they may prevent the carrier from detaching from the rope. They must be kept well lubricated so that they can rotate easily and do not wear out. A roller must be replaced as soon as its diameter is worn down by more than 10 millimetres. Likewise, gripping jaws always have to be kept clean so that they work properly; this step is necessary because safety depends heavily on the reliable action of moving parts. The nylon liners in the carriage wheels break or wear out often. When that happens, they have to be replaced with new carriage wheels or the nylon liners have to be changed.

OPERATIONAL PROBLEMS

Ropeway operation sometimes poses problems. Despite routine maintenance and repairs, some mechanical failure is inevitable. Some of the problems that have occurred in the past were due to parts becoming old and worn with use, while others were due to weather or the lack of parts and equipment. Over the years quite a number of problems have occurred, ranging from the simple to the bizarre.

The coupling of a load sidetrack rope failed once. This major snag took one­and-a-half months to rectify. In order to avoid such problems in the future, about 1,000 metres of track rope was replaced while the coupling was being fixed. The track rope has fallen off the towers twice; each time it took two to three months to repair and cost 1.7 million rupees. Of the seven wires on the tower tops, only three are currently working: the emergency wire (for stopping the ropeway) and two telephone wires. There was also a problem with the DC motor winding at one point and four of the coils had to be changed. They were ordered from Kirloskar, an Indian company, at a total cost of one million rupees, but since Kirloskar said it could supply the coils only after six months and it was not desirable to keep the ropeway inactive for such a long time, locally-made coils were used temporarily. The motor started running at a slower speed—1,000 rpm as opposed to 1,400 rpm—but the factory had to make do until the new coils arrived.

A new problem that has occurred after 17 years of operation is that one pressure frame has sunk because of a landslide and is no longer supporting the track rope. Heavy rainfall and the difficulty in accessing the pressure frame have made it necessary to shut down the ropeway temporarily. Because some of the towers and pressure frames have been built in places that are difficult to access by road, it is difficult to rectify problems which occur at these locations, especially during the monsoon season. Even problems that could have been solved easily became problematic and rendering them time-consuming simply because it was hard to reach the towers. To overcome such problems, the Udayapur Cement Factory, which has a similar ropeway system, has built all its supporting structures in easily accessible locations in order to reduce the time and effort required for repair and maintenance.

One bizarre problem occurred when the local municipality started dumping garbage under the ropeway line. A dumpster truck got entangled in the hauling rope and was lifted by it and carried over a mountain before it fell off. Luckily no one was hurt, but it could have been a serious problem endangering lives and damaging the ropeway. This unexpected problem was the result of ignorance. A few other operational problems that have been encountered are itemised below.

1                     High voltage can cause surges and even burn ropeway components, both of which are problematical.

2                     Breaker trips due to interruptions in the supply of electricity are a common problem faced by the ropeway.

3. Gearbox lubrication pressure needs to be maintained at all times.

4. High wind speeds cause buckets to swing. It is important to stop the system until the wind speed decreases.

5. Scattered pieces of limestone accumulate along the line, causing low clearance and obstructing the passage of the buckets. These accumulations need to be swept away periodically .

6. Nylon tyres should be replaced as soon as they are damaged.

7. Nuts and bolts become loose during operation; their tightness must be checked daily before and after operation.

8. The gearbox is a vital part of the system and when changed should be replaced. A spare must be kept available in the inventory.

9. If the grip of a bucket is loose, it fails to hold onto the rope. It then runs faster due to gravity, striking other buckets on the line and damaging them. To prevent this, all grips have to be checked regularly.

10. It is necessary to employ a trained splicing expert. The factory has trained technicians to splice the hauling rope.

11. The emergency system still uses a naked wire, which causes problems because it breaks down often. If possible, naked wires should not be used.

12. The factory uses a naked wire and an old-style telephone system for communication. It is unreliable and breaks down frequently. As a result, communication among the various stations along the ropeway fails every now and then. A modern communication system would prevent such failures.

13. The side roller should run smoothly. While the clamp is being unlocked, the carriage should not jerk sideways or grind on guard angles. Locking and unlocking must be smooth and free from any jerking or snagging.

14. A minimum of three buckets should always be in the retarder and at the spacer. Fewer than three buckets results in a missed spacing and the material for the missing bucket will be discharged onto the ground. To prevent the material from spilling, whenever damaged buckets are put on the parking rail for servicing, good buckets should replace them.

CONCLUSION

This semi-automatic ropeway system brings limestone from the quarry to the Hetauda Cement Factory as part of the continuous feeding of raw material to the production process. For this reason, it could be thought of as an industrial ropeway. For the plant to remain operational, the ropeway must keep delivering limestone; any delay in supply diminishes the plant’s cement output. Unlike other ropeways used for transporting cargo or passengers, this ropeway is an integral part of the production process and must run to ensure that cement production continues. Time is very important in any production line. Proper coordination between the operation of the ropeway and that of the main cement plant is critical.

Because it carries stones, the parts of this ropeway wear out quickly. Also, since it works automatically at several stations, including the loading and unloading stations, a snag at one point creates problems for the entire cement production system. Continuous monitoring of the system and a very effective repair and maintenance team is an absolute necessity. Though a few problems have hampered the delivery of stones in the past, the maintenance team at the factory has ensured the proper functioning of the ropeway.

The ropeway runs for long hours. The people involved in the operation and maintenance of the ropeway at the Hetauda Cement Factory are able to operate it as required and to deal with challenges successfully. The ropeway helps bring down the cost of cement production to a competitive level, which is important if the industry is to contribute to the national economy.

The use of a ropeway to transport limestone has proved to be effective. The main reason for its success is that once the ropeway begins running it can transport limestone almost continuously with very few stoppages. Fewer employees can operate and maintain it than would be needed to operate a fleet of trucks. Time and again there have been shortages of petrol and diesel in Nepal; if trucks had been used this would have resulted in disruptions in the supply of limestone to the factory.

One problem regarding the ropeway is that when breakdowns occur the time required to repair the system can sometimes be long (measured in months) simply because replacement parts are not available within the country. The stoppage can result in financial losses because production is hampered. Another problem is that some towers and stations are located in isolated places and accessing them to conduct repairs is difficult, especially during the monsoon. A final disadvantage is that a specialised maintenance crew is needed to check the system thoroughly because of the large distances over which inspections and repairs must be carried out.

Source: Ropeway in Nepal

Building Barpak’s Community Ropeway

An Engineer’s Experience with Low-cost Goods Transport in the Hills
BHOLA SHRESTHA
TECHNICAL EXUBERANCE
Kathmandu was virtually cut off from the rest of the country when, on 19 July, 1993, a disastrous cloudburst washed away several bridges and portions of the Prithvi Highway. Trucks that carried daily necessities like kerosene, salt, vegetables and petrol were stranded on the Highway. With the roads closed, the capital and its residents were practically besieged. Throughout this crisis, Nepal’s oldest ropeway continued to haul goods from Hetauda to the capital. Unlike the highways in the affected region, which had effectively been put out of commission, the ropeway had remained intact.
During this critical period, Srikrishna Upadhyaya, then a member of the National Planning Commission (NPC), called Bikash Pandey at the office of ITDG-Nepal. Upadhyaya felt that the fact that the ropeway was still functioning despite the disaster and that expensive highways had been rendered useless was proof that this was an appropriate technology that should be promoted. He suggested that ITDG-Nepal investigate the uses of ropeway technology in Nepal. At that time, I was the manager of the ITDG-Nepal’s end-use project, whose aim was to introduce new technologies that would increase the plant factor of MHP.1 When Bikash informed me about the conversation, I agreed to investigate how ropeways could be developed as end users of MHPs.
I visited Jhimruk Hydropower Plant, where Himal Hydro had built a small ropeway to haul materials to the headworks site of the plant. It was cheaper and also less damaging to the environment than an equivalent length of road. The Jhimruk Ropeway impressed me on two counts. First, the local capacity to build a material ropeway was already in existence. Second, small ropeways for transporting goods had the potential to improve rural access as well as to increase the plant factor of MHPs.1
In December 1994, Bikash Pandey and I visited Washbang, a Chepang village in northern Chitawan, to survey a MHP project. On the way, he told me that Akkal Man Nakarmi, who had made significant contributions toward promoting MHPs in the country, had an unrealised dream of developing ropeways in Nepal.2 He had picked up the idea of Peltric sets when he visited Switzerland,3 and had developed and promoted them after coming back to Nepal. Peltric sets have now become ubiquitous in the hills of Nepal.
A visit to the Alps to learn about the Swiss approach to developing ropeways seemed the next logical step. In June 1995, Akkal Man Nakarmi and I flew to Austria, where Mick Prince, who had completed his undergraduate thesis on ropeways in Nepal at the University of Warwick, UK, and Reinhold Metzler, a German engineer who had worked in Nepal and who was our escort, joined us. We spent a week driving to mountain communities in the Swiss and Austrian Alps to study and learn from the ropeways there.
During the week-long trip to the Alps, we observed a range of ropeway technologies. Many Swiss and Austrian dairy farmers operated short ropeways twice a day to carry milk to collection centres. These systems were owned and operated by individual families. They were particularly handy during the eight winter months when roads were covered in snow. Because the government provided subsidies to meet part of the cost of investment, the systems were affordable. One system we saw had been constructed in 1947 and still used by an old woman farmer. We also saw small ropeways which had been promoted over roads in the 1920’s and 1930’s as an economical alternative for transporting goods to small hilly settlements. At that time, remote communities in the Alps faced conditions similar to those Nepali villagers faced in the 1990s. After concluding that short ropeways would indeed be appropriate for Nepal, we contacted companies that manufactured ropeways and winches.
ROPEWAY INITIATIVE BY ITDG-NEPAL
At the time of our visit to Switzerland, ITDG-Nepal, as part of its collaboration with KMTNC’s ACAP efforts, had been working for a number of years with the community of Ghandruk located south of Machhapuchre in Kaski District.4 Every day, a considerable amount of cargo is transported to Ghandruk through Syauli Bazaar, which is about 800 metres below the village. For us at ITDG-Nepal, Ghandruk was an obvious site for installing a ropeway to transport goods as there was a demand and there was a 50-kW community-managed MHP to power it. After a reconnaissance survey was completed in May 1994, Mick Prince conducted a study that included a survey of European ropeway products and their prices. These investigations revealed to us that the costs of imports were very high, but that the total cost of a ropeway could be lowered if locally fabricated towers and hangers and Indian-made steel ropes were used. In fact, the more local material could be used, the lower the costs would be and the more local manufacturing would receive a boost. If too many components had to be imported, we found, the cost of installing a ropeway would be beyond the reach of a Nepali community in the hills.
In 1996, when Andrew Barnet, the technology policy director of ITDG-UK, visited Ghandruk, village leader Min Bahadur Gurung requested ITDG-Nepal to help the community install a ropeway to replace mules and donkeys, the local beasts of burden which transported goods but also that littered the trekking path to Ghandruk with their droppings. ITDG’s research on different ropeway systems and quotations from European suppliers indicated that a ropeway connecting Syauli Bazaar with Ghandruk—a distance of about four kilometres—would cost Rs 10-12 million. This amount was three times the cost of the Ghandruk MHP, which had been built in 1991 for Rs 3.5 million. An investment of this scale was not within the scope of either ITDG’s micro-hydro end-use project or the community. Besides, the ITDG-UK office viewed the proposal for a ropeway as a programme of transportation, and hence outside the purview of its organisation in Nepal, whose limited mandate was capacity building within the MHP sector.
In the meantime, Dipak Gyawali and Ajaya Dixit of Interdisciplinary Analysts (IDA), Kathmandu, had completed a study of ropeways for ITDG-Nepal in 1996. They investigated whether or not there was a future for small ropeways to transport goods in the mountains, and in their report, suggested that small ropeways do indeed have a future but only under certain political-economic and institutional conditions. If two alternative but mature industries of Nepal—the suspension bridge and the MHP industries—could be married through the ropeway industry, there would be, they concluded, a bright future for this technology. The merger would cut costs for both industries and expand their markets. These ideas were discussed with many other ropeway experts and enthusiasts at a seminar jointly sponsored by ITDG-Nepal and Butawal Power Company (BPC) in Galyang, Syanja, in mid-April 1996.
Participants were optimistic about the economic benefits accruing from goods-carrying rural ropeways although some were sceptical about institutional modalities. If it were undertaken at all, the ropeway initiative would be a transport programme rather than a MHP end-use programme. Because we lacked a mandate to work on transport and were already heavily involved in the micro-hydropower sector, ITDG-Nepal was unable to take a ropeway project on board. The ropeway initiative within ITDG-Nepal thus seemed to fizzle out in April 1996. But it was fated to end not with a sigh, but rather with a different sort of bang.
SUPPORT TO LOCAL INITIATIVE
In November 1996, Bir Bahadur called me from Barpak asking me to help him build a goods ropeway project in Barpak, itself. Bir Bahadur Ghale is the owner of the 50¬kW MHP that provides electricity to more than 600 households in the village. He has earned a name as a successful micro-hydro entrepreneur and has proven himself as a ‘can-do’ sort of young man. Although just a few years earlier, his power plant had been struck twice by lightning and the generator damaged, he remained undeterred. The generator was brought to Kathmandu for repair, and, to everyone’s surprise, the repaired unit was flown back to Barpak on a chartered helicopter flight to get the powerhouse running again quickly. With a loan of over two million rupees and its interest compounding, Bir Bahadur was facing a financial crisis. The revenue generated by the power plant was not enough to pay its operators and had to be increased. During all of Bir Bahadur’s tribulations ITDG-Nepal had maintained a long and fruitful relationship with him.
As ITDG-Nepal had supported Bir Bahadur, it had a stake in seeing the Barpak MHP succeed. Barpak MHP was the first project of its scale initiated by a private entrepreneur and ITDG-Nepal could not afford to let it fail. But Barpak MHP was a classic case of a financially weak project where significant daytime power was not being used as there was no demand for its application. As a site for a pilot end-use project, Barpak was an obvious choice. Not only was daytime power unused, the revenue from the sale of electricity for lighting and for running an agro-processing mill would not make the project solvent. The Barpak MHP had to pay off a loan of more than Rs 1.2 million with interest and Bir Bahadur needed help in increasing revenue.
In 1994, ITDG-Nepal had advised Bir Bahadur to set up a paper industry to use the daytime load of his power plant. It became a successful industry that employed 25 people, 18 of whom were women, and had buyers from Kathmandu at its doorstep. ITDG-Nepal provided him with a locally-fabricated electric digestor and advised him about how to market the product. Bir Bahadur was also ITDG’s partner in running the service-centre concept of promoting micro-hydro power in Gorkha District and his achievement by far exceeded ITDG’s targets. Bir Bahadur was dynamic, energetic and optimistic, and by this time had also gained much experience. He had proven to be a reliable partner in ITDG’s end-use project.
Bir Bahadur’s request for assistance in initiating a ropeway project in Barpak was compelling. He had already, for example, got Gottfried Rohrer, a retired Swiss ropeway company owner, to complete a survey for installing a ropeway there. Rohrer had been invited to Nepal by Akkal Man Nakarmi to investigate the possibility of building a passenger ropeway and Bir Bahadur had met him by coincidence at Akkal Man Nakarmi’s workshop. He had persuaded Rohrer to go to Barpak to inspect the site he proposed for installing a ropeway between Rangrung and Barpak. Rohrer opined that a passenger ropeway was out of question because of the high cost involved he claimed that the investment required did not match the economy of Barpak and instead recommended installing a second-hand system to transport goods from Rangrung to Barpak, the steepest stretch of the walk into Barpak. A suitable unit, if bought at an auction in Switzerland, would cost about one-fifth the cost of a new system.
Rohrer’s suggestion was behind Bir Bahadur’s repeated calls to me and his request for help in establishing a goods-carrying ropeway in Barpak. Since he had already put forth so much effort, his desire was understandable. Bir Bahadur’s initiative matched ITDG’s philosophy of helping people who, in line with Schumacher’s much-favoured quote, help themselves. Thus, several favourable factors were in place: locally available energy from an MHP; low-cost ropeway equipment; NGDG, which Bir Bahadur himself headed, and a determined young leader with a strong entrepreneurial track record. Furthermore, when completed, such a system would eliminate the burden of the five-to-six-hour walk up the steep Rangrung-Barpak stretch. Each day hundreds of women and men from Barpak and Laprak, a neighbouring village, trudged up and down this steep climb. I decided to support Bir Bahadur’s initiative even though the ropeway was outside the purview of ITDG-Nepal.
ITDG’s head office in the UK was concerned that the ropeway would displace porters, leaving them unemployed, and that the pylons (towers) would be risky in the fragile Himalayan landscape. We in the Nepal office, however, had a different perspective. Since the ropeway was to be built only along the steepest stretch of an arduous, near-vertical climb and would reduce drudgery for porters that verged on the inhumane, neither they nor mules would be adversely affected. They would still be required to carry goods from Gorkha Bazaar to Rangrung, a one-and-a-half day’s journey. Also, because the pylons were to be only six metres high, there would be no major risks.
Since the groundwork—selecting a site, conducting a preliminary survey and identifying the type of ropeway—was complete, the next steps were to carry out a detailed survey and design of civil works, to conduct a feasibility study and, most importantly, to seek financing. In December 1996, Bir Bahadur and I met the Third Secretary of the British Embassy to solicit his support for the ropeway project. When Bir Bahadur introduced his activities and showed pictures of Barpak, the MHP, the Nepali papermaking industry and the bakery, the Secretary was impressed and said he would present the idea to the Ambassador. Dipak Gyawali, Ajaya Dixit and I met the Ambassador at a reception at the British Embassy; he said the proposition was ‘interesting’ and soon after asked that a proposal be submitted within two weeks. Based on the preliminary cost estimate, I prepared a proposal on behalf of NGDG and submitted it to the Embassy. Soon after, I commissioned Himal Hydro to conduct a detailed survey and design study. A pre-investment study conducted simultaneously showed that the ropeway was financially viable and that its payback period would be eight years.5 In May 1997, the British Embassy approved funding for the Barpak ropeway project and an agreement to that effect was signed with NGDG. The equipment ordered from Switzerland arrived in Calcutta in July 1997.
In agreement with the UK office, I was to serve only as an adviser to NGDG, which would itself be primarily responsible for the project. Gradually, however, my involvement increased until it included almost all aspects of project planning and preparation. Estimating the costs of various aspects of the ropeway with Himal Hydro, coordinating the source and supply of equipment with Gottfried Rohrer, and holding various technical consultations all fell into my lap. Bir Bahadur would arrive at the ITDG-Nepal office in Kathmandu early in the morning and would stay till late in the evening as we worked together for almost six weeks. Prior to placing the order for the equipment, it was important to verify its condition. Since travelling to Switzerland would be expensive, we requested Carl Muller, one of our Kathmandu-based Swiss friends for his help. Upon his request, the Nepal-Switzerland Friendship Association got Hans Aschmann, a senior engineer who had worked in Nepal, to inspect the equipment at his personal expense. He informed us that the equipment was in perfect working condition (Annex D).
ECONOMY OF BARPAK AND THE RANGRUNG-BARPAK STRETCH
The village of Barpak, which is inhabited mostly by Ghale Gurungs, is about one-and¬a-half walking days (nearly 45 kilometres) north of Gorkha Bazaar, the nearest roadhead and the headquarters of Gorkha District 
About 4,370 people live in the 786 houses of Barpak proper, which are spread across a radius of about one kilometre. Barpak is perhaps one of Nepal’s largest mountain settlements. Laprak, where another 600 Gurung houses huddle together, is three hours further uphill. More than 80 per cent of the men in Barpak work outside of the village, most in the Indian and British armies and a few in Hong Kong. Women, who remain behind, take care of homes and farms. Although a few local shops supply daily consumer goods to local people, families usually travel all the way to Gorkha Bazaar to purchase rice, edible oil, salt, sugar, kerosene, biscuits, soap and noodles at cheaper prices. Individuals carry small loads themselves, but normally it is porters who carry loads exceeding 50 kilogrammes over the two-day trail from Gorkha Bazaar to Barpak. A tentative estimate showed that, on an average, each household spends about 26 days a year travelling to Gorkha Bazaar to buy daily necessities and carrying them back to Barpak. Shopkeepers and a few wealthy households employ porters or mules to transport goods for them.6

The local economy is dependent on subsistence agriculture but Barpak is a food-deficient village. Only one-third of the households produce sufficient food to last for a year; the rest meet their needs with imports from Gorkha. In fact, one estimate showed that 1,200 tonnes of goods are carried from Gorkha to Barpak each year (Poudel, 1997). Except for potato seeds from Laprak, local exports to Gorkha are insignificant. Rice and wheat are grown in the flood plains of the Daraundi River below Barpak. Crops cultivated in the flood plain of Daraundi, where many households of Barpak own land, is carried up to the village by family members.
The Rangrung to Barpak stretch is the hardest and the most gruelling of the two-day walk. The steep 1000-metre hill takes five to six hours to climb. In contrast, the trail from Gorkha along the Daraundi River is relatively flat although it occasionally passes along over small ridges. We found that the people were delighted by the proposal to install a ropeway along the Rangrung-Barpak stretch. Barpak was an obvious choice for a goods-carrying ropeway.
While a gravel road from Gorkha was due to reach Baluwa (near Rangrung) in a few years, there were no plans to build a road from Rangrung to Barpak. Even if a plan were made, it would cost about Rs 24 million to build a road. The proposed ropeway would be four times cheaper (Table 10.1) and would have minimal environmental impacts during and after installation. The ropeway would also increase the plant factor of the Barpak MHP. Constructing a ropeway system between Rangrung and Barpak seemed the right thing to do.
SHARING RESPONSIBILITY
The parties sharing the responsibility for planning and implementing the community ropeway project operated along sectoral lines. NGDG was responsible for providing all unskilled labour and local materials worth 10 per cent of the total cost; ITDG-Nepal served as an intermediary support organisation for project preparation, planning and management support; Gottfried Rohrer of Planug Realisation supplied equipment, provided technical advice, oversaw erection ,7 and tested and commissioned electromechanical equipment. Finally, Himal Hydro was responsible for the survey, design and supervision of civil works construction. Of the total cost of the project (Rs 6,407,000), the British Embassy in Kathmandu provided Rs 4,646,895.
After it completed the detailed survey and design, Himal Hydro had two options regarding its role in the civil construction works on site. The first possibility was to supervise the construction of civil works, which entailed providing three skilled staff members on site under the supervision of an engineer, in order to help NGDG carry

* At eight kilometres times Rs 3 million per kilometre, the rate for green roads in the hills.
out civil construction works. The second option was that Himal Hydro directly construct all civil works with materials supplied by NGDG. The cost of the latter proposal was twice that of the first option, but I, as an engineer, favoured it, since this was a novel enterprise and it was important to have a highly experienced contractor to do a good job. NGDG and Bir Bahadur, however, chose the first option over my objections. With hindsight, I can say that many of the problems we encountered during construction would have been avoided had we let Himal Hydro do the job; but, at the same time, the community would have missed out on a key learning experience.
COMMISSIONING, IMMEDIATE BENEFITS AND DISASTER
The Barpak Ropeway, which was completed at a cost of Rs 6.4 million (Table 10.2), was commissioned on 8 February, 1998, and inaugurated by British Ambassador Barnaby Smith on 3 March, 1998. Soon after it came into operation, a Ropeway Management Committee (RMC) was formed with Deo Bahadur Ghale, a member of NGDG and the individual in charge of the construction of the Rangrung return-station, as the chairperson. The committee had representatives from the VDC and the local community, including one woman. Three operators and a manager were employed to manage day-to-day operations. The Ropeway made an average of 20 trips a day, hauling about three tonnes of goods to Barpak from 10 AM to 5 PM, and generated an average daily gross income of Rs 1,500. The cargo hauled and income generated

Description of cost Amount Rs (103)
Route survey and design, construction, supervision of civil works, tower 541
erection, stringing of cable management and coordination during construction Second-hand ZP-300 Swiss Army ropeway equipment, shipment from
1,008
Switzerland to Calcutta, additional cable from Spain and shipping Modification of petrol engine to accomodate electric motor
407 Material for civil works (500 bags of cement, six towers and cable shoes, 550
six sets of stay wires and rods, reinforcement bars) Erection of transmission line 155 Construction tools and equipment 187 Land, preliminary preparation (forest clearance), local materials, unskilled labour 555 Transportation 1,182 Training of operators 22 Erection by Swiss engineer (fee and travel allowance)
1000 Management and administration 200 Contingency 600 Total 6,407
by the ropeway is shown in Table 10.3. The operation of the Ropeway reduced the time spent hauling goods from five to six hours on foot to just 15 minutes. Walking without a load on this section saved sweat, hardship and about five hours. At the rate of Rs 0.5 per kilogramme (compared to the other least expensive options of Rs 2.30 per kilogramme by mule and Rs 3 per kilogramme by porter)8, ropeway users received a fair deal.
Though it was too early to quantify the ropeway’s benefits, studies showed that drudgery had been reduced, the prices of essentials had dropped and that porters had not, as some had feared, lost their livelihoods. In addition, new economic activities had sprung up and the energy of the MHP was more fully utilised.9 About 800 households in Barpak VDC, 600 households in Laprak and a few households in the village of Gumda and beyond—a combined population of over 8,000 people were served by the ropeway. Some 40 per cent of the goods transported belonged to the people of Laprak.
The people of Barpak and Laprak reported that the ropeway reduced drudgery and saved more than a day in commuting to Gorkha and back. Hence, they were pleased with it. The fear that porters would have no work was unjustified. In fact, the increase in the volume of goods reaching Barpak actually generated more work for porters, but reduced the inhumane hardship they had to bear on the five-hour uphill climb to Barpak. Overall, the monthly income of porters rose and the prices of daily commodities fell as more goods were made more easily available in Barpak shops (NGDG, 1998). Bir Bahadur eventually fixed the tariff of the Barpak Ropeway at Rs 0.5 per kilogramme although the initially proposed tariff was Rs 1 per kilogramme.

Source: Earth Consult (2000) and Bir Bahadur Ghale (personal communication)
Villagers found the rate fair since it was the equivalent of carrying a 40-kilogramme load up a steep slope for five hours for Rs 20. More houses were constructed in Barpak because transporting sand and boulders from the Daraundi River and cement from Gorkha Bazaar became easier. In our original study we had not predicted that sand for construction would become a major item of demand. The villagers of Laprak used to carry potatoes to sell in Gorkha Bazaar during the summer; the ropeway made this journey much easier. Some people, like Deo Bahadur, were inspired by easy transportation and introduced sugarcane planting in Rangrung. The harvest was good and was brought to Barpak by ropeway to be sold at Rs 5 per cane. On-the-job experience in planning and organising various components of the project with partners such as ITDG-Nepal and Himal Hydro enhanced the confidence of NGDG members. Local people acquired skills in concrete work, bar bending, tower erection and cable stringing. In addition, the Swiss erector trained three local people to operate and maintain the ropeway.
Transporting about 40 tonnes of construction goods and construction activities during the implementation of the project generated local employment. The ropeway employed six staff members—a manager to handle cash, maintain books, and keep records of the goods transported; two operators; and three persons to load and unload goods and carry out weekly maintenance. The management and operation of the ropeway was the responsibility of the RMC, whose members were nominated through the village assembly. The RMC consisted of two members each from NGDG,10 the VDC, a women’s group, the poor section of the community, shareholders and a group of elders.
There were plans to train the RMC members and help them grow. ITDG-Nepal offered to provide support for the training and building capacity of the RMC, but for some reason NGDG did not seem excited by the suggestion. Support was provided to help formalise the RMC and work out how it could function effectively. We did not, however, have enough time to predict how successful the RMC would be in managing the ropeway before disaster struck in the summer of 1999, from which point the ropeway operation came to a halt after fifteen months of commercial operation.
In a review in 2000, ITDG-Nepal judged the main cause of failure to be ‘poor operation and maintenance’. As if this accident and death in May due to human negligence was not enough, in June 1999 the Rangrung Khola catchment experienced a cloudburst which resulted in a flood that completely washed away the return station on the river’s left bank. The report’s conclusion stated: ‘The high intensity rainfall had created debris flow in the Rangrung Khola which undermined the old alluvial fan of the stream and damaged the lower station’.
The local people had not seen a flood of such magnitude in 50 years. In hindsight, locating the return station at the same level as the Rangrung Khola’s suspension bridge would have been safer. The upper drive station, however, was safe though it was located near an old landslide which could have rendered it unstable. Old and new landslides seen at the site of the upper station carried with them future risks.11
UNFORESEEN DIFFICULTIES
The implementation of a novel venture such as a community-operated goods-carrying ropeway in an area that had never seen such technology resulted in many unforeseen problems, some of which are discussed below.
Power shortage: The problem of the shortage of power came to ITDG-Nepal’s notice only in August 1997 after the ropeway equipment had already arrived in Calcutta. Although the installed capacity of the Barpak MHP was 50 kW, actual generation was much lower. According to Bir Bahadur, it ranged between 36 and 43 kW, depending on the availability of water. In August 1997 ITDG-Nepal confirmed that it was even less than this, which meant that operating the ropeway with the existing daytime load would be problematic.
As the existing power output was already overstretched, Bir Bahadur had planned, even before the idea of the ropeway was introduced, to build a second 28¬kW plant using the tail water from the existing plant. He had promised that the new plant would be built before the ropeway was installed, but it was not. The second plant was to use a PVC pipe imported from India but it was not supplied on time either.
The reason for low power output was that only one turbine jet was operational. Opening the second jet caused the generator to vibrate because the connection between the generator and its base frame was makeshift. ITDG-Nepal recommended replacing it with a sound base so that both jets could be operated and full power generated. It only came to ITDG-Nepal’s notice in November that the owner had followed a different plan and shifted the plant to a site three metres down the river. Work on the generator took place when the Swiss erector was in the village to install the ropeway. The owner used the same makeshift connection and, although power output increased by a small margin, the vibration was not permanently eliminated. These problems with the generator diverted focus from and disrupted ropeway erection activities and required the Swiss expert to make an additional, expensive return trip.
The ropeway used daytime power as it operated continuously from 10 AM to 5 PM. The ropeway motor consumed 12 kW once it was running (and about 18 kW to start up). This new demand significantly increased the plant factor—over its capacity, in fact. Since the plant produced only about 30 kW and supplying power to the ropeway cut, the supply of power to households and other small enterprises, including the bakery, during the day. Only a mill and households in Ward No. 7 received electricity. The supply and demand relationship became unsatisfactory. Although the ropeway had been installed on the condition that the MHP owner would build a second plant so that sufficient power would be available, Bir Bahadur was unable to do so.
Technological: Problems with the line design led to insufficient tension in the cable, which, in turn, resulted in the reduction of its carrying capacity from 300 to just 150 kilogrammes. Consequently, the performance and resultant income from the ropeway declined. Another challenge was the location of the drive station in an area with unstable slopes. After a geo-technical investigation of the drive station area commissioned by ITDG-Nepal, it was recommended that NGDG take slope stabilisation measures before the onset of the monsoon. These measures included improving the drainage on the sidewall and providing gabion support below the drive station; the measures were not, however, implemented. The RMC did participate, but either its members did not understand how urgent these steps were we failed to impress upon them their responsibility. Thus, neither RMC nor NGDG took action when major funding was on offer from the British Embassy. Because the RMC did not mobilise the local contributions upon which support was conditional it received no money.
The plan to upgrade the payload capacity of the system by increasing the height of the cable did not take place for the same reason. When Gottfried Rohrer viewed Barpak Ropeway in early 1999 he was perturbed to find that the operating conditions were poor. 12 The hauling cable was completely dry because lubricant had not been applied for a long time and the cable touched the ground at one point. He attributed these lapses to negligence on the part of the management. As soon as this information was received, at ITDG’s initiative, a meeting was held at ITDG-Nepal’s Kathmandu office with key persons of the RMC in order to address the problems that Rohrer had identified. A work plan was prepared and responsibility divided, but the committee members did not follow up on their responsibilities. Since ITDG-Nepal did not own the Barpak Ropeway and only served in an advisory capacity, it withdrew from engagement with the ropeway venture shortly thereafter.
Managerial: Poor management and coordination during construction led to delays. NGDG was not able to provide the 10 per cent of the total costs in the form of local contributions in kind (local materials and labour) that it had committed itself to. It could only manage to contribute about three per cent. NGDG was relying totally on paid labour when I reached Barpak in December 1997. I persuaded Bir Bahadur to raise additional cash. With his salesmanship skills he raised about Rs 400,000 for further investment in the project, most of it remittances from overseas Barpakis.
Though it was made clear that the ropeway was not meant for people and a signboard at the driving stations declared that the movement of people was prohibited, Barpak Ropeway was, in fact, used as a passenger ropeway. The management could not stop people from travelling on the ropeway and even fixed the price at one rupee per kilogramme of body weight. On 7 May, 1999, the hauling rope of the ropeway snapped and four people travelling on the ropeway were killed.
REFLECTING ON THE EXPERIENCE
This ropeway was a pilot venture from which lessons must be drawn so that future efforts in this direction are more sustainable. Many organisations and individuals supported the ropeway; but many of the assumptions and values of these well-meaning supporters demand review and reassessment.13 They include: the cost-reducing approach favoured by many technical NGOs such as ITDG-Nepal; management difficulties characteristic of a society unused to this new technology; and issues of coordination among development partners. The experience at Barpak provides an opportunity to openly assess successes and failures.
Drudgery reduction: The Rangrung to Barpak was stretch a suitable site. Barpak is a large mountain village with a populated hinterland which provided sufficient demand. In one day as many as 28 trips were made. The ropeway was an effective end-use of the MHP. It demonstrated the best use of electric power: saving about 450 hours of labour each day using only 12 kW.14 However, the actual condition of the power plant needed a more thorough appraisal.
Appropriate technology: Building a road would have cost Rs 24 million and agricultural land would have been lost. In addition, it would have increased reliance on imported diesel and contributed to pollution. The environmental consequences due to landslides would have made maintenance very costly. A ropeway, in contrast, is cheap to maintain and environmentally friendly; besides, it uses locally-generated electricity. This, of course, is true in theory: in practice, inculcating a proper maintenance culture in a community, which has never used such an artefact, is the equivalent of a project by itself. Promoters of ropeways need to be aware of this painful reality.
Cost reduction: To reduce costs, a reliable second-hand ropeway system in good condition was procured, the involvement of expatriate experts minimised, a local construction contractor employed, locally-built pylons used and the community involved. The complete 2.5-kilometre ropeway system with six pylons weighing about 10 tonnes cost one million rupees. Four pylons were fabricated locally as per the original sample and additional cable was purchased from Spain. Unfortunately, cost minimising measures can sometimes result in compromises that can revisit the project later and increase its overall cost. This happened in Barpak with civil works and transportation.
Communications: Good communication among working partners is important. All was fine until August 1997, when work on site began and communication gaps developed. After much effort these gaps were repaired and the revised target met. One serious consequence of this communication gap involved power production.15 The plant owner was the main person in the community responsible for coordinating with Himal Hydro, the Swiss erector and ITDG-Nepal; but the fact that his attention was divided between the powerhouse and the ropeway had a detrimental effect on project coordination. Until the short-haul ropeway industry in Nepal grows more mature and until wider usage of ropeways in rural Nepal gives birth to more local experience in a wide range of areas, pilot projects should not substitute a novice user group for an experienced, full-time manager.
Field implementation: The absence of clear coordination increased costs. The guide wire locations had to be relocated as they were inadvertently erected in the wrong places. Similarly, cost increased because, after landslides undermined initial efforts, more concrete work was needed to accommodate the drive station in two different sites. In the field, poor progress in civil construction and the relocation of the powerhouse at the time of the Swiss erector’s visit hampered installation. His visit itself had to be organised twice as the required preparation during his first visit was far from adequate. Ten helicopter trips instead of five were required to carry the cable drums from Gorkha to Barpak because only low capacity helicopters were available. Himal Hydro, a regular client of helicopter companies, subsequently said they could easily have negotiated a better price if NGDG had asked for assistance.
Skills transfer and capacity building: Even though Himal Hydro is an experienced company, it was its first experience working on a community project in a remote area. Himal Hydro depended on the local community for its unskilled workforc, and transferring basic construction skills to the community turned out to be a more complex task than it had envisaged.
LESSONS FOR THE FUTURE
While it functioned till May, 1999, the Barpak Ropeway served the mountain settlement well: it reduced drudgery and saved time. It also diversified the enduse of the Barpak MHP and improved its plant factor. It also provided very limited local employment. Finally, the experience at Barpak provided many lessons, some of which are:

The Barpak experience has established that rural ropeways are appropriate for easing the hardship of carrying goods up steep hills where there is a large population (more than 5,000) to serve. Its other benefits include savings in time, easy access to goods and economic incentives. Although a ropeway is cheaper than a road, initial investment costs are still prohibitively high for many local communities and pose an obstacle to the widespread proliferation of the ropeway without sensitive, ameliorating government policies.
Taking a capacity-building rather than a project approach can bring down the cost of a ropeway if done with flexibility and sensitivity. Indigenous capacity building in the fields of MHP and suspension bridges over the last 30 years provides a model for the approach to pursue in ropeway development.
Local units of self-governance such as DDCs and VDCs should be made partners and be involved in all stages of a project, right from the outset— identifying where they should be built and how much the users should pay for services. Relying on a single charismatic leader to carry out a community project has its benefits but is also risky. The process of community mobilisation and institution building must be initiated as a precondition to initiating a community project.
Agencies which promote community ropeways must be prepared for the unpredictability and lack of professionalism that is inevitable when a community is a partner. The inherent risks require contingency plans, particularly in relation to backstopping support. Support must be provided in terms of technical information, operation and maintenance, and management.
Involving local people in the construction and management of the Barpak Ropeway meant that skills were transferred to them. In the process, community confidence was built. But in this case there was constant dissatisfaction, particularly in communication and coordination among the Swiss erector, the local company and the construction committee. Smooth cooperation among actors in a ropeway project is a requisite. This can be achieved by clarifying roles and responsibilities at the outset, which involves significant investment of time in community interactions.
The level of local expertise available for the design and construction of ropeway works is inadequate. It needs to be developed through working

with expatriate specialists. Once local capacity is established, as happened with suspension bridges over the last three or four decades, the role of expatriate experts can be reduced.
� A clear agreement on the purchase of power and the penalties of default should be drawn up between the ropeway operator and the power plant to an ensure that there is an adequate supply of power.
Geographical factors and high costs do not allow Nepal to contemplate connecting all its hill and mountain settlements by roads. Settlements can, however, be connected with low-cost, environmentally friendly material ropeways. The Barpak Ropeway showed that this was indeed a possibility. Although several factors helped to bring this intervention to fruition, the Ropeway still failed. Its collapse can be attributed to two main reasons. First, since it was not designed to transport passengers, its factor of safety was so low that any accident would be fatal. That people used a ropeway not designed to ferry passengers reflects a lack of technological discipline and weak regulation. Second, given the severe impact of cloudbursts and floods, the local capacity to design and build adequate towers and foundations needs to be developed further. In this particular case, the suitability of the sites for locating the stations was not adequately assessed. The employment of local expertise can help reduce costs but caution is warranted.
NOTES
1 The plant factor is the ratio of energy used to the total energy the plant could produce at full capac¬ity. Load factor is the ratio of the total energy used to the energy that would be produced if the plant operated at peak demand continuously throughout the year.
2 The first Nepali recipient of the Swiss ‘Rolex Award for Enterprise’ for developing the multipurpose power unit (MPPU) in 1984.
3 A small Pelton turbine coupled with an induction generator with a single shaft to produce 1-3 kW of electric power from small streams. More than 1,000 of these have been installed in Nepal so far.
4 KMTNC (King Mahendra Trust for Nature Conservation), an environmental protection organisation man¬dated by an Act of Parliament. Annapurna Conservation Area Project (ACAP) began in 1986 with the objective of strengthening linkages between ethics, economics and environment by looking at local communities as both the principle actors and the beneficiaries of conservation undertakings.
5 See Poudel (1997).
6 See ITDG-Nepal (1995).
7 Rohrer arranged for a senior Swiss erector to install the electromechanical equipment and test the ropeway’s commissioning.
8 See NGDG (2055 BS).
9 Upon completion of the project, two studies were conducted. One, entitled ‘A Socio-economic Impact Assessment of the Ropeway in Barpak’ was conducted by a student of the Imperial College of Science and Technology, London, for her M.S. thesis and the other, ‘Rangrung-Barpak Ropeway Project Report’ was undertaken by NGDG, Gorkha. The figures discussed in the given two reports.
10 Although Bir Bahadur did not agree to be a member of the RMC, he was instrumental in convincing prominent Barpakis to serve as the chairperson and members of the committee.
11 See Earth Consult Pvt. Ltd. (2000).
12 At his own initiative while he was in Nepal on another assignment to carry out preliminary survey for a private cement industry.
13 Which includes moral support by Toni Hagen, who, waiving five person-weeks of communication, came to Kathmandu with the shipping documents of the dispatch from Switzerland, and advisory support services from Switzerland by Gottfried Rohrer.
14 The reduction in payload capacity decreased the power requirement to some extent. The use of a capacitor bank provided the cushion for the higher initial starting current the motor required.
15 During my visit to Barpak in December, I found that the distribution voltage had dropped as low as 150 V.
REFERENCES
Earth Consult, 2000: A Case Study of Rangrung-Barpak Ropeway, A report submitted to ITDG-Nepal, Earth Consult (Pvt.) Ltd., Kathmandu.
ITDG, 1995: A Baseline Study of Barpak by Simkhada, Urmila, ITDG-Nepal, Kathmandu.
NGDG, 2055: Rangrung-Barpak Ropeway Pariyojana Pratibedan, (In Nepali: a report on Rangrung-Barpak Project) Northern Gorkha Development Group, Barpak, Gorkha.
Poudel, R., 1997: Pre-Investment Study on the Proposed Rangrung-Barpak Ropeway, ITDG, p. 12, March, Kathmandu

Source: Ropeway in Nepal

Understanding the Technicality of Ropeways

A ropeway is a mode of transport in which special types of carriers are suspended from, or simply attached to, an overhead rope to facilitate the transfer of materials, goods or passengers, from one point to another. The rope runs the entire length over which the ropeway operates, which typically ranges from a few hundred metres to several kilometres. The rope is stretched between, and supported at, the end-point stations using anchors. When the distance between two stations is large, intermediate towers are used to support the rope. Longer ropeways are comprised of small sections joined together by divide stations. A divide station has the means to transfer carriers from one section to the next.

The capacity of a ropeway is measured by the load it can carry per hour and depends upon factors such as the speed of travel, the number of carriers and their capacity. The number of carriers varies: a simple system may have only a single carrier, while a complex system could have several carriers placed at regular intervals along the line. The basic components of a ropeway are a cable(s), carrier(s), and supporting structures.

COMPONENTS OF A ROPEWAY

Rope: The rope or cable of a ropeway fulfils two functions: it bears the suspended load and hauls it along. Depending upon the design, a cable can do one or both of these functions. A rope is made up of several strands of steel wires spun together. At the centre of the rope, and of each strand in it, is a core which supports the wires and strands respectively, keeping them in the correct position and minimising friction between them. A stand may contain a single ‘king wire’. In a rope the core may be a strand (a wire-strand core) a second smaller rope (an independent wire-rope core), or a fibre core. A steel-core rope is less flexible but stronger than a fibre-core rope of the same size. The greater strength of a steel-core rope allows the rope to retain its shape under high surface pressures, which ensures that the load is evenly distributed among the wires. Rope with a fibre-core is generally used as a hauling cable.

Ropes can also be classified according to the way in which the wires and strands are laid (Figure 4.1). In an ‘equal lay’ rope, all the wires in a strand are wound with the same helix angle. Wires lie either along the crown of an underlying wire or in a valley between two underlying wires. This construction requires that wires of different layers be of different sizes and that the smaller wires be closer to the core. In a ‘cross­lay’ rope the wires in all layers are the same size and a different helix angle or length of lay must be used for each layer. This arrangement results in stress being concentrated at the points where the wires of different layers cross each other.

Ropes can be further classified based on the methods used to wind the strands together; there are two common ways: ‘lang-lay’ and ‘ordinary-lay’ (Figure 4.2). In a lang-lay rope, the direction of the lays of the outer layer of wires is the same as the direction of the lays of the strands within the rope. In an ordinary-lay rope the outer layer of wires is laid in the opposite direction of the lay of the inner strands. Because the outer wires are exposed for a longer time in the lang-lay arrangement, a better and more uniform wearing surface is provided. A lang-lay rope is also slightly more flexible than an ordinary lay rope but, at the same time, more susceptible to untwisting and kinking. This makes a lang-lay rope hard to handle and limits its application to situations in which it can be fixed permanently at each end to prevent its untwisting.

Ropes are specified according to their diameter, number of strands, number of wires in each strand, type of core, arrangement of wires in the strand, and direction of rope lay. For example, a rope of a given diameter may be specified by numbers such as 6 x 19 and 9/9/1. The first number (6) denotes the number of strands in the rope. The second number (19) denotes the total number of wires in each strand. The second set of numbers describes the configuration of each strand: the first number indicates the number of wires in the outer layer (9) followed by the number of wires in the inner second layer (9) and the number of wires in the core (1).

Ropeway carrier: A ropeway carrier consists of a carriage and a container (Figure 4.3). The carriage is made up of a box head and a hanger. The box head attaches the container to the hauling rope by means of a clip or wheels that run over the supporting rope in a bi-cable system and/or over the station shunt rail in other ropeway systems. The container may be a bucket, a tray or a passenger cabin and is suspended from the carriage by means of a hanger which, in general, is curved so that the carrier is able to pass by support stations and towers (trestles) without hitting them.

A bi-cable tower has saddles as well as a roller battery, while a mono-cable tower has only a roller battery to support the hauling-carrying rope 

Wooden towers can be used in a ropeway which transports materials in a construction project. This type of ropeway is dismantled after construction is complete. Concrete towers are generally used for small ropeways, while steel towers, because they are reusable, are commonly used in all types of ropeways. Steel towers also provide the flexibility to make towers of any size by using steel frames of pole or lattice type. Large towers are built using lattice frames which are transported to the location and assembled.

Tension stations: Tension stations placed at appropriate points along a ropeway line are used to limit the length and maintain the tension of the track cable. The cable is provided with the required tension using track tension equipment or by anchoring it to the ground.

Drive station: A drive station contains the drive system of a ropeway, which includes a motor drive mechanism and a driving sheave. It also has equipment to maintain the tension of the rope. Suspending counter-weights from a tower or in a pit or a combination of both usually achieves this.

Return station: This station at the end of the line contains a return sheave, from which carriers move back towards the drive station. Equipment to maintain the tension of the hauling cable may be placed in this station as well.

Divide stations: These intermediate stations are used in long ropeways to limit the length and tension of the rope. They divide a ropeway into smaller segments, each of which functions as a separate ropeway. These stations are also provided with fixed rails so that carriers can be transferred from one segment to the next, either manually or automatically.

Sheaves: Sheaves are wheels of large diameter found at both ends of the line and in the stations. The hauling rope passes around them. A driving sheave is powered either by an engine or an electric motor connected to the sheave with a suitable drive mechanism. At the other end of the line there is a return sheave which is not powered but is free to rotate. It responds to floating counter-weights, which maintain the tension in the rope. The rotation of the driving sheave and the difference in tension between the lines at the incoming and outgoing ends causes the rope to move.

TYPES OF ROPEWAYS

Two major types of ropeways systems are used: bi-cable and mono-cable systems. A bi­cable system uses two ropes. The first is a load-carrying rope which is fixed at the stations at both ends and stays stationary. This rope is also called a track rope, track cable, or skyline. Carriers are suspended from the track rope by wheels which glide over it. The second rope is a hauling rope whose ends are joined to make a loop. The loop is mounted on the sheaves at the stations. The carriages, which are suspended from the track rope, are attached to the hauling rope at fixed intervals using grips. At the drive station, a motor powers the drive sheave. When the sheave rotates, the hauling rope moves in a circle and so do the carriages. When a carriage enters the station its grips are detached from the hauling rope and it moves onto the station rail (see Figure 4.5).

Bi-cable ropeway system

A mono-cable system uses a single rope, which serves the dual purpose of carrying and hauling carriers (see Figure 4.6). Carriages used in a mono-cable system do not have wheels; instead, they are attached to the rope by grips and move when the rope moves.

Ropeway systems may be further sub-divided into circulating and non-circulating systems and systems using fixed or detachable clips.

In a non-circulating system, the hauling rope (or hauling-carrying rope in the case of a mono-cable system) moves forwards and backwards between the loading and unloading stations. One important point about a non-circulating system is that, in a system with one track cable, it can move only one carrier. In a non-circulating system, if the hauling rope winds into a drum then the ropeway is called a drum-type non-circulating bi-cable system (Figure 4.7). In this case, when the carrier goes down, it moves with the force of gravity. The hauling rope has two functions: the first is to control the speed of the carrier when it goes down and the second is to pull it up.

Instead of using a drum, the hauling rope can also form a loop but in this case the direction of motion of the rope must be changed in order to move the carrier back and forth. Such a system is called a looped non-circulating bi-able system (Figure 4.8). A looped system may also use two track cables, in which case it can move two carriers, one carrier on each side. The carriers are always on the same side of the line, because they do not pass the rotating sheaves.

If the carriers run on two sides, then the ropeway may be a mono-cable or a bi-cable to-and-fro system with one carrier on each side of the line. This type of system is arranged so that when one carrier is at the start station, the other is at the return station.

In a circulating system, the hauling rope runs continuously in one direction and passes around the sheaves at the ends. The cars move from one side of the rope to the

other as the rope moves from one station to the other and back. The carriers are detached from the hauling cable temporarily at a station and transferred to a fixed rail for loading and unloading; meanwhile the hauling rope keeps moving with other carriers.

Ropeways are also classified according to whether they have fixed or detachable clips. In a fixed-clip system, the cars are permanently attached to the hauling rope and remain so even when travelling around the sheaves. In a detachable-clip system, each car is manually or automatically detached from the continuously running rope when it enters the station. The car then moves along the station rail on a set of wheels provided in its box head to the other side of the line, where it is clipped back onto the moving rope (shown in Figures 4.5 and 4.6). This feature allows for flexibility in the loading and unloading of cars as well as ease of maintenance and easy removal or addition of cars without affecting the operation of the ropeway.

The ropeways mentioned above are powered either by electric motors or engines, but there is also another class of ropeway, the gravity-operated or self-driven ropeway, which has no external power service. This type of ropeway, whose points of loading and unloading are at different elevations is simple to construct, and thereby often used as a temporary setup (Figure 4.9). The type of ropeways currently used in Nepal are compared in Table 4.1.

There are also mobile ropeways called winch ropeways or cable cranes, which consist of the engine-powered drum of a winch and a specially-designed gripping device that travels on a temporarily-installed skyline cable (Figure 4.10). The cable from the winch passes through the gripping device and is used to lift or deliver loads. Unlike other ropeways, which have fixed stations for loading and unloading, a winch can be stopped at any point to drop or pick up a load. This flexibility makes a winch useful for transporting timber out of forests without damaging the environment. It is also used to transport construction materials across valleys and mountains. Laying

the pipes for the penstock of a hydropower plant or for a drinking water system, for example, can be done using a cable crane.

In Nepal, a cable crane was used to haul the concrete used to manufacture the tetra poles which stabilised the Charnawati River in Dolakha District, which had deepened by five metres during a flood in 1987 and, as a result, threatened the Lamosangu-Jiri Road. Tetra poles cast at the site were used to prevent the river from deepening further. Though transporting concrete by truck from the road to the site in the river channel about a kilometre downstream would have been less expensive, the idea of building an access road was rejected as it would have made the riverbanks more unstable and further jeopardised the road. In any case, the cable crane delivered the material right where the tetra poles were placed and thus provided flexibility in their construction.

MAINTENANCE

How well a ropeway functions—and ultimately its viability—depends on how diligently it is maintained. Even when no particular problem has manifested itself, the system must be religiously inspected at regular intervals. In the Barpak case described in this book (see chapters 9 and 10), the snapping of the hauling cable of the ropeway was attributed to the lack of timely lubricating and tensioning of its ropes.1

Usually the manufacturer provides maintenance guidelines that must be followed very carefully, especially if the system is used for more hours a day than it is designed for. The wear and tear of the various moving parts of any ropeway reduces the life of that system. Just because a ropeway is operating does not mean that its overall performance will be free of problems. Tower bolts and parts loosen with time; pulleys are displaced from their original alignment; and the tension provided to the rope will decrease over time. Decreased tension could reduce the system’s efficiency, causing the rope to sag excessively and the carriers to hit the ground. In extreme cases, the rope itself might touch the ground, damaging to it and the carriers. Too much sag also causes carriers to swing when it is windy and can result in collisions with towers. These problems need constant correcting.

Most accidents and ropeway failures occur due to slackness in maintenance as the following example of the 2.5-kilometre-long Darjeeling-Rangeet passenger ropeway demonstrates. Established in 1960, this ropeway was supposedly checked daily and overhauling was done annually. In October 2003, however, it snapped killing four persons and injuring eight others. The failure was attributed to the fact that routine maintenance procedures that were not alert enough to diagnose the brewing problem.2 High quality work is crucial to the successful operation of a ropeway, but is, in itself not sufficient. In order to ensure safe and efficient service, the regular inspection and maintenance of a system is equally essential. Timely and proper maintenance not only enhances the life of a ropeway but also ensures its efficient, smooth and safe operation. Lack of maintenance results in poor operation and can be fatal for operators, users and people living along the ropeway alignment.

Maintaining a ropeway system comprises two main activities: maintaining the tension of the rope and lubricating its moving parts. The rope must be kept at the recommended tension in order to limit its sag and to retain its load-bearing capacity and life. Tension equipment and anchors are used for this purpose. Tensioning must be carried out as soon as any shift in the alignment is noticed or the wire starts to sag more than is recommended.

Ropes must always be well lubricated. The exact frequency of lubrication needed depends upon factors such as weather, the duration and type of operation and the type of rope used. Since a fibre-core rope stores lubricant and supplies it gradually to the outer wires, less lubricant needs to be applied to it manually. However, one must still ensure that the core has adequate lubricant. Lubrications should be done more often during the monsoon when falling rain washes away the oil. Long duration of use, and/ or continuous operation also requires that increasing frequency of lubrication to keep the rope clean and to protect it from the weathering effects of air, wind, storm abrasive dust particles. Lubrication also saves the ropes from chemical reactions associated with rains and the chemicals (especially acids) dissolved in it. By minimising friction between moving parts and supports, lubrication ensures that operation is smooth and quiet and as a result, the mechanical elements perform better and last longer.

The misalignment and wearing of pulleys can result in the displacement of the rope, which is heavy and under high tension. A slight shift in its alignment can transfer large stresses to pulleys and rope strands and thereby cause severe damage within a short period. This shift could occur for various reasons, the most likely of which is loose nuts and bolts. To keep the rope properly aligned requires that nuts and bolts be kept tight at all times. If pulleys are provided with rubber linings to minimise the wearing of the rope, they must be replaced as soon as they wear out. Worn-out and non-functional pulleys must also be quickly replaced.

In a bi-cable ropeway, the track rope remains stationary and the pulleys of the carrier roll over it. This action wears the upper side of the rope where the pulleys come in contact with it. Although the spiral construction of a rope causes it to rotate a little when a load passes along it, the other three sides of the rope wear less rapidly. To avoid the excessive wearing of only the top, the rope must be periodically rotated 90 degrees to ensure uniform wear around the rope and to prolong its life.

Maintenance also involves moving the track rope a few metres from its existing position. Though the rope is fixed and remains stationary, it moves slightly from its position at the saddle when a loaded carrier passes along it. After the loaded carrier has passed, the rope returns to its original position. In addition, changes in temperature cause the contraction and/or expansion of the rope relative to the saddle. This movement results in the lower surface to wear faster than the upper side of the rope caused by the movement of carriers because the additional load of the rope adds to the cargo load. Wear is also higher because the friction in sliding in higher than that in rolling. Since the rope comes back to its original place when the ropeway is at rest, such wear is difficult to observe. To prevent excessive wear, the track rope must be moved along its length by a few metres so that a new section rests on the saddle. This operation can be performed when rotating the rope.

The fraying of ropes causes most ropeway accidents. A rope does not snap at once; instead, fraying commences gradually. As each individual wire of a strand breaks, the strength of the rope is considerably reduced. Each successive wire breaks more easily and until the rope snaps. To prevent this from happening, the condition of the rope must be carefully checked. If any individual wire is broken, it indicates that the rope’s overall strength has declined. Broken wires can be spliced together by a skilled technician, but repeated splicing can reduce the rope’s integrity and it must be replaced to improve safety. These maintenance activities help prevent accidents.

Ensuring effective maintenance essentially means inculcating a technological culture and a scientific outlook, which attributes are not prevalent to the required degree in any rural setting in developing countries. Since the ropeway industry is in its infancy in Nepal there are very few local experts that can provide maintenance support. Unlike operation training, which is provided by ropeway manufacturers at the time of installation, and for which the operators develop skill over time, such support, even if provided rigorously in the beginning, is likely to be weak when the actual maintenance activities are undertaken. A sound maintenance culture will come about only if those engaged in various aspects of ropeway industry—those in civil society concerned with safety as well as those in the government crafting and enforcing laws—engage constructively with each other. It is a long, hard and continuous, but ultimately beneficial process into which industries, owners and communities need to build a fair number of self-help, self-regulating and policing mechanisms.

NOTES

1 Earth Consult, 2000: A Case Study of Rangrung-Barpak Ropeway, A report submitted to ITDG Nepal, Earth Consult (Pvt.) Ltd., Kathmandu.

2 Times News Network, October 20, 2003

-MADHUKAR UPADHYA AND KIRTAN RAM BHANDARY

Source: Ropeway in Nepal