STRUCTURAL DESIGN SOLVER DEVELOPMENT FOR OVERHEAD

INDUSTRIAL CRANES: EQUATIONS-OF-STATE SOLVER METHOD

by
JOEL CHRISTIAN WARREN

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of Master of Science

Thesis Advisor: Dr. Roger D. Quinn

Department of Mechanical Engineering
CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY

May, 2012

CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF GRADUTE STUDIES
We hereby approve the thesis/dissertation of
Joel Christian Warren
candidate for the

Master of Science

(signed)

Maurice Adams, Ph.D.

degree *.

(chair of the committee)
Ken Loparo, Ph.D.
Malcolm Cooke, Ph.D.
Claire Rimanc, Ph.D.
(date)

January 19th, 2012

* We also certify that written approval has been obtained for any proprietary
material contained therein.

Page | 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS:
i.

List of Figures

pp. 4

ii.

Abstract

pp. 8

1.

Typical problems in structural analysis that requires solutions

pp. 9

2.

Applications that apply directly to overhead crane systems

pp. 10

3.

C.M.A.A. Structural Design Specifications

pp. 12

4.

A.I.S.C. Structural Design Specifications

pp. 15

5.

Proposed method for structural analysis

pp. 16

6.

Aspects of analysis to be developed with new program

pp. 18

7.

Programming Details

pp. 22

8.

Solver Parameters

pp. 35

9.

Solver Development
a. Stage 1: Girder Solver Development

pp. 45

b. Stage 2: Runway Solver Development

pp. 68

10. Strengths & Weaknesses of the comparative analysis methods

pp. 93

11. Path of design development in overhead crane systems

pp. 98

12. Reasoning to bring cohesion to analysis methodology

pp. 101

13. Results and Conclusions

pp. 104

14. Appendix

pp. 106

15. Bibliography

pp. 143

Page | 3

Sectional properties of composite section & design checks pp. 24 response (i. 21 7.6 Table 4. 30 8. Eight Wheel Case pp. 25 7.1 Table 1.2 Bending Moment Stress Distribution Diagram for Girder Section pp. 53 9. 19 6. 55 Page | 4 .5 Table 3.2 Under-running Mono Box Crane Design Render-1 pp.7 Symbolic tabulation for calculation of cross-section properties pp.4 Girder Loading Distribution Diagram. 40 9.3 Bending Shear Stress Distribution Diagram for Girder Cross-Section pp.6 Runway End Truck Loading Diagram. 29 7. 26 7. Four Wheel Case pp.e. List of Figures 6. 49 9.1 Runway Calculation-1 (preliminary solver format) pp.1 Top-Running Double Box Crane Design Render pp.jpg pp.1 Stress-strain correlation curve for conventional ductile material pp. 48 regions and dimensions 9.4 Girder Cross-Section Diagram for 8-point Location Reference pp. Data entry of girder cross-section sizing and required span pp.3 Under-running Mono Box Crane Design Render-2 pp. low carbon steel) 7.i.4 Table 2. 29 7. 45 9.3 Table 1 reference image of girder cross-section and corresponding pp.7 Table 5. calculations for the Ix inertial resistance of the cross-section pp. calculations for the Iy inertial resistance of the cross-section pp. Structural configuration of the crane’s bridge & operational pp. 18 6.5 Runway End Truck Loading Diagram. 49 9. 25 7. 19 6.

58 Girder Cross-Section/Girder Loading 9. 75 referenced from “Handbook of Structural Engineering” 9. Traditional end truck crane configuration parameters pp. 68 9. selection of runway beam. Shear Stresses & Combined Stresses for Selected Girder Cross-Section 9. 78 . 57 girder cross-section sizing and component configuration 9.18 Table 14. Bogie end truck crane configuration parameters pp. 63 Axis Bending Stresses.15 Table 11. the resultant weights and wheel-loads values. Design Check for pp. 66 Excitation 9. Eight-Point Stress Calculation/Check for Strong & Weak pp. Design Check for Buckling of Single-Web Members. and cap properties pp. 68 9. Frequency Response of Girders to Vertical & Horizontal pp. 70 9. selection of runway channel cap. cell length. 74 9.22 Table 17. 64 for Selected Girder Cross-Section 9.14 Table 10b. selection of runway rectangular rail.10 Table 8.20 Table 16.13 Table 10a.8 Table 6.12 Table 9.16 Table 12.19 Table 15. and beam properties pp. Stress Calculations.11 Dimensional Reference Diagram for Eight-Point Stress Calculation pp. based on the pp. Design Check for Top Flange Compression of Single-Web Page | 5 pp. Girder Deflection.hoist/trolleys 9. 68 9. and rail properties pp.17 Table 13. Sectional properties of composite section & design checks pp. as pp. Impact Multiplier Selection for Runway Shock Loads pp. 71 9. 72 9.9 Table 7.

11 http://nvptmk.Members. Fatigue check for girder loading/cross-section pp. 11 http://www. 11 http://www.1 480/100t Ladle Crane pp.4 Gantry Electrical Crane pp. 79 loads/stresses/design check/deflection 9.gantry-crane. 90 http://www.S. 1.com/Article107. Dual loading (8 wheel) resultant runway pp.26 Tables 21.keytometals. 2011 7. 2012 2. Single loading (4 wheel) resultant runway pp.1 Fig. 9th Edition” & CMAA Section 70. 89 9.html. Fatigue check for runway single end truck loading pp.3 QD Double Girder Overhead Crane pp.3.htm.com. 2012 2.7 9.C Allowable Stress Design. The engineering stress-strain curve Page | 6 pp. 89 9.I.org/tag/tower-cranes/.ru/eng/cold-store_equipment/Cranes_kozl.cn/crane/zz.2 Metallurgy Overhead Crane pp. 34 .23 Table 18. 11 2.27 Tables 22. as referenced from “A.25 Table 20.5.tyhi. 2012 2.24 Table 19. 84 loads/stresses/design check/deflection 9. Fatigue check for runway single end truck loading pp.html.

html.com/nanotech/mechano. 9.1.Machinery’s Handbook.3. 2000 7..8 Tabulated Calculation of Moment of Inertia pp.5. New York.1.2 Section 70. 26th Edition. 47 Girder Cross-Section http://www. Article #70.3. Industrial Press Inc. required sizing for Longitudinal Stiffeners for pp. 32 Crane Manufacturers Association of America.21 Fig. the Basic Buckling Element Page | 7 pp. Revised 2004 9. 1990 9.zyvex. “Specifications for Top-Running Bridge & Gantry-Type Multiple Girder Electric Overhead Traveling Crane”. 76 .

a specialized analytical solver was developed.Structural Design Solver Development for Overhead Industrial Cranes: Equations-of-State Method Abstract By Joel Christian Warren Structural engineering analysis for overhead industrial cranes is performed by a number of methods throughout industry: by the use of hand-calculations. Page | 8 . to aid in the optimization process. behavioral simulation packages. and are not designed to focus on the analysis of the crane as a whole system. This analysis is performed using equations-of-state modeling in a two-stage process: the first stage addresses the crane structure and optimization. This requires re-iteration of engineering work for each subsequent stage. the second stage addresses the runway structure and optimization. This solver combines the structural analysis for all aspects of the crane design. or by different custom-made sizing programs. Design checks against code and crane industry standards are performed constantly. leading to unnecessary rework and waste of engineering resources. To bring cohesion to the engineering analysis. These methods are specific to a single aspect of crane design.

Common practice is the development of custom analysis tools. And often enough. Design parameters are often subjected to quick changes. and functionality requires design analysis and certification. utilizing data common in industry and/or company practice. An effective design is a functional design. undercutting investment cost. and designs must remain flexible yet functional. Accurately estimating the most effective design (optimization) leads to more efficient use of resources.1. design analysis tools are limited in their functionality and availability for many organizations. Quick and accurate certification is key to providing the best and most cost-effective designs. based on requirements. Typical problems in structural analysis that requires solutions Structural analysis in overhead industrial cranes is a process subject to many revisions. while maintaining design versatility. Page | 9 . increasing profitability. Design tools that capture most of the design parameters early in conceptual development allow for the best use of resources.

and electrical systems of the crane assembly. mechanical.the weight to be lifted and conveyed during operation. so must the crane assembly framework. 3. generally a design-specific rated capacity. Page | 10 . Just as the building structure must be capable of handling excitation from seismic activity. Applications that apply directly to overhead crane systems Crane systems have to be designed under the consideration of four primary types of loading: 1. Dead loads . which is anchored to a building structure or alternative support framework.the weights of all structural. Applied loads . These loads are typically modeled using static loading criteria (at least in reference to the dead loads and applied loads) upon the assembly.2. This serves as a safeguard to allot for what is unknown. This is done to simplify the calculations and iterative process. an extremely iterative calculation methodology. in regards to the variable loading capacities and operation-lift time and traverse time. 4. Fatigue loads – cranes are utilized on a cyclical operation with repetitive loading and unloading of conveyed loads (or packages). design factors of safety are generally higher than what would normally be required. Because static-loading criteria are chiefly used in the design analysis process. 2. Seismic loads – cranes are typically operated on a suspended railway. as that dynamic loading requires time-step modeling.

The thesis of this paper is as follows: the development of equation-of-state solvers for structural (and mechanical) analysis leads to the optimized case for overhead industrial crane design . the more effective the designer can be with design development . the more which is known about the governing operations parameters and what can be accurately simulated.and the more cost-effective the design becomes in the fabrication/construction of it.1-4: Sample images of different configurations of overhead industrial cranes Page | 11 . 2. Fig. In other words.which is maximization of effectiveness whilst minimizing resource investment.

A. calculations and general rules of thumb.S. and a modal excitation minimum fundamental natural frequency of 2.M. and fabrication set in place by the American Institute of Steel Construction (A.I.).A.A.C.A. These specifications are written to ensure that all industrial crane designs maintain a high-enough margin of design safety to keep all allowable stresses within the elastic range of material behavior.7 for structural members. and operate in conventional environment constructed according to A.H.3.S. the organization is composed of leading and established manufacturers of industrial cranes and hoisting equipment. a column/elastic buckling minimum safety factor of 1.4 Hz for structural and mechanical members. A subset of the Material Handling Industry of America (M.A.I. as that the majority of industrial cranes are fabricated using plate and structural steel. a minimum factor-of-safety against ultimate tensile of 5.A) serves as the selfestablished guiding body of industrial crane design and development throughout the United States of America. This organization sets the standards for industry-wide design methodology. fabrication specifications.).M.0 for mechanical load-bearing members. and acceptable manufacturing tolerances. analysis. C.I. A set of design specifications is provided to members.M. analysis.A. standards. consisting of a governing guideline of codes. C.7. Page | 12 .C.-approved designs are expected to have a minimum factor-of-safety against yielding of 1. The specifications draw heavily upon standard precedents of design. Structural Design Specifications The Crane Manufacturers Association of America (C.

accelerations.Structural and mechanical analysis of the sections is a process that makes use of iterative design analysis. This serves as a means to determine which structural section and mechanical configuration provides the highest amount of design safety. Other companies have considered the use of finite-element packages Page | 13 . but also in the secondary planes of traverse loading as well. written to quickly calculate the required properties of the structural section. As a result. modeling potential failures not only in the primary plane of loading. multiple vectors of loading and dynamic excitation have to considered. many companies utilize standard design tables for quick-reference. whilst being the lightest (ergo. most cost-effective) and simplest to fabricate. many companies employ design-calculation software. operational and fatigue-life. span (distance between supports of crane). as that many loading parameters and dynamic acceleration factors have to be considered in the calculations. mathematics packages. equations-of-state solvers – to name a few. The development of the standards tables takes a great deal of time to complete. these tables consists of design sections which have been carefully analyzed. to ensure an operationally-effective design and a more optimally cost-effective one too. and proven to be viable for the governing design parameters of loading capacity. To speed up this iterative process. This software is available in a number of formats: spreadsheets. the results are operationally-effective – but may not be costeffective to the end-user to justify the purchase. The iterative process of design checking is a time-consuming one. In addition. and often enough.

commercially-available and even some custom-developed packages. Page | 14 . if feasible.as well to speed up the analytical process.

weldment and fabrication specifications.C. 9th Edition (ASD 9th Edition). and acceptable criterion.C. Allowable Stress Design.I.C.) organization. In overhead industrial cranes. most designers and engineers turn to the guiding specifications of the American Institute Steel Construction (A.S. Structural Design Specifications In the design of industrial steel structures. For over 90 years.4. one of the foremost A. tabulations of material strength properties and inertial properties for a majority of structural sections.S. Page | 15 . including: design parameters. the guidelines established by this body have been in place to ensure that all steel constructs have a high-degree of inherent safety and a long design life. A. ASD 9th Edition provides a foundation in the selection and analysis of structural members of the crane. reference diagrams based on principles of engineering mechanics and case studies. ensuring functionality for many years. This manual is especially important to the crane manufacturer in that the majority of overhead industrial specifications are directly inherited from it.I. modeling specifications.S. specifications is the Manual of Steel Construction.I.

Proposal methods for structural analysis The current proposal for improvement on this methodology is to use the template method. For many manufacturers. by which all aspects of the crane and supporting structural system can be sized with limited preliminary information. to develop geometric and analytical templates for the most-common fullsystem configurations. And one could design a system that is further optimized to specific and specialized needs. one could better approximate the reactionary demands induced during operation.5. consideration of fatigue must be addressed. This would then be solved by a multiple degree-offreedom methodology (examples of numerical methods. By considering cases of actualization (distributing the actual lifted capacities according to theoretical lifts over a pre-specified period of time). linear regression. design of the crane Page | 16 . Fatigue wear and degradation is induced in any system subjected to cyclical loading and operations. and homogenous matrix reduction) to further optimize the configuration and present preliminary findings for design/cost consideration. to determine if the general optimization (based on maximum rated capacity) can be further improved. Further refinements would be to consider loading cycles and variances. And to develop these system analyses modules as part of a global resource. In addition to static and dynamic design cycle analyses. These analyses would require only the basic loading geometric and performance characteristics of the system in question. And from the choice in template. the governing equations-of-state are established and tailored to meet the dependent requirements of the system.

In addition. Designing the structure and mechanical systems to infinite life serves as a means of safeguarding the manufacturer against liability issues. without having to be concerned about erroneous reference entries or data manipulation. Since numerical methods are typically used for engineering analysis.as that the process of servicing fatigue-damaged cranes after years of use is very cost-intensive. and better fatigue sizing would allow manufacturers to better gauge their price -point commitment to warranty activities and repair services on the system aspects which are most likely to fail accordingly. and calculation to be performed in one consolidated file. Mathematica) for solutions. data protection enables the developer to tailor the information for source accordingly. The versatility and ease of programming available in Microsoft Excel® allows for multiple sources of entry. In fact. there is really no need to develop in specialized engineering or analytical mathematical solver packages (examples of them are such as: Matlab. All in all. and even dangerous if the failure occurs in the field before repairs are made. MAPLE. iteration. Page | 17 . all of the required calculations can be performed in a basic tabulated format (spreadsheet format).structure to infinite life fatigue criterion is simplest . and provide additional safety factor to account for degradation. Fatigue analysis which best incorporates the available design parameter information allows for the most effective and sustainable designs. data lookup. Microsoft Excel® serves as a very versatile program for the development of such a deliberated engineering solver. with excellent database development tools that are required for such a high-level project.

with the top-running accounting for the first-stage of development: 1. Approximately four different crane configurations are to be developed in this overall analysis program. precise and accurate reactions and stress/strain data would be available for review. After which.6. one that would enable quick and precise preliminary structural calculations for a number of overhead cranes and their supporting structural assemblies.1: Reference image for top-running double box crane with top-running bridge end trucks Page | 18 . 6. Aspects of analysis to be developed with new program The development of this new calculations software would have an analysis setup. It would enable users to start with preliminary templates for design and operation. and allow users to modify governing parameters to meet their needs. Top-running double-box with top-running bridge end-trucks Fig.

Under-running single-box with under-running bridge end-trucks Fig. 6.3: Reference image for under-running single box crane with under-running bridge end trucks These calculations will cover a majority of the typical designs that would be commonly-used in most interior lifting applications.2: Reference image for under-running single box crane with top-running bridge end trucks 3. Under-running single-box with top-running bridge end-trucks Fig. 6. Larger Page | 19 .2. Capacities would range from fractional-tonnage to about 50 tons for safe free-standing applications.

Bottom-left web/flange intersection 6. Bottom-right web/flange intersection 7. These would be superimposed with primary shear stresses and secondary shear stresses. figure 6. Bottom-right flange extrema Page | 20 .capacities would require greater in-depth analysis to be certain of design safety and developmental capability. Top-left flange extrema 2. Stresses for the structural member would be calculated at the primary eight corners of the crosssection (ref. Top-right web/flange intersection 5. Bottom-left flange extrema 8.4): 1. Top-left web/flange intersection 4. Top-right flange extrema 3. Results would consist of primary bending stresses (from loads) and secondary bending stresses (from traverse forces). and using vector summation to get an accurate value of the full-stress range the system is exposed to.

Fig. Page | 21 . 6.4: Reference image girder cross-section with primary eight-points of cross-section stress concern Stresses would also be calculated at the traverse rail for the hoist. This would be repeated for the runway beam as well. using compression criteria.

Required camber to meet structural deformation allowances 3. Induced reactions and moments at bridge supports c. Travel range (hook travel for lift. Crane span c. Optimization of the cross-section via iterative calculations Page | 22 . Development of the geometric and structural requirements a. Programming Details The development of the custom program required establishing the governing relationships between operational parameters. Operational speeds d. Required cross-sections for structural loading (inertial resistance) d. Starting with the basics of girder structural/mechanical analysis. and acceptable/required design criterion. trolley travel for bridge. we have the following procedure of development: 1. The following listing serves as a master point of reference for what was considered important in the implementation of the custom solver package. crane travel for runway) 2. Length of the bridge (for trolley travel) b. Identification of the driving dimensional and operational parameters a.7. Selection of an initial cross-section to meet span and dimensional window requirements a. based on industry guidelines. Crane capacity b.

i. To maximize the inertial properties of the runway section (structural resistance to stress and deformation ii. Selection of an initial runway supporting cross-section to meet crane loading and operational requirements a. To maximize the wheel spacing (wheelbase) to reduce induced runway moments (and minimize stresses and deformation) 5. Optimization of the cross-section via iterative calculations i. Determining reactions based on applied loadings and weights a. Optimization of the crane end truck via iterative calculations i. Designed to handle structural/mechanical reactions based on applied loadings and weights from crane operation b. To minimize the wheel-base to meet required runway travel ii. To minimize the weight of the structure (saving on material and labor investment) 4. If pre-existing runway is in place. design check serves as a means of validating the use of the existing runway for the proposed crane design i. To maximize the inertial properties of the bridge section (structural resistance to stress and deformation ii. To minimize the weight of the section (saving on material and labor investment) c. Verifying the structural integrity to be compliant to requirements as-is Page | 23 .

low carbon steel) Page | 24 . Identification of the first order hinge-points of yield throughout the supporting member (i. locations of the maximum bending moments and shears that lead to yield onset within the runway cross-members) a. 7.ii.e. Based upon the onset of the yield strength of the material under loading Fig.1: Stress-strain correlation curve for conventional ductile material response (i.e. Or providing an optimized means to reinforce the runway as required for crane operation at proposed configuration 6.

b. 7.2: Simplified stress diagram for material response to bending moments within the elastic range of response (before yield onset) c. 7.3: Simplified stress diagram for material response to bending shear within the elastic range of response (before yield onset) Page | 25 . Superimposed for the case of beam bending Fig. With the case of beam shear Fig.

Bridge structure (beams. Sum of each hoist’s maximum rated load is not to exceed the rated load of the bridge Page | 26 . Lifted load the crane is to handle. 7. Additions (service platforms/walkways. magnets. Maximum rated load for each hoist available on the crane b.Fig. These variables are as follows: For the girder weight calculation. consisting of: a. etc. lights. Dead weight of the crane. Bridge end trucks (for support of bridge along runway rail. boxes.4: Girder loading distribution diagram. Hoist/trolley weights (frame. motors. with corresponding variables of reference. etc) 2.) b. electrification. consists of: a. drum and reeving – generally consolidated into a single unit) c. the primary parameters to consider are as follows: 1. allowing for traverse of crane up/down the runway) d. trusses.

(7. during operation of the crane. per safe operation definition) ii. for single hoist/trolley As calculated for a two wheel end truck (symmetrical distribution of loads). the hoist(s) at maximum rated load (sum not exceeding bridge rating. Wheel loads of the crane.1) Equation 7. where Pn is the applied load from each pair of wheels. This wheel load is calculated with: i. equidistant from the center of the runway rail. The moment balance to solve for the maximum wheel load for a single hoist/trolley system is as follows: ( ⁄ ) . to solve for maximum wheel load. Page | 27 . This load is then distributed amongst the wheels of the end truck via a moment balance. which is the reaction at the wheels of the end truck.1: End reaction calculation. a. at full traverse to one side of the bridge iii. at minimum spacing between wheels of the hoist/trolley units b.3. resultant being the highest wheel load reactions induced by crane operation into the runway 4.

symbolic expression for finite series of hoist/trolley systems For the current programs. where the additional wheels of each remaining hoist is calculated using the following generalized equation: ( ⁄ ) ∑ . and to a single or dual hoist upon the bridge. The moment balance to solve for the maximum wheel load for the two hoist/trolley system is as follows: ( ⁄ ) ( ) .3: End reaction calculation. to solve for maximum wheel load.5. This allows for Page | 28 . (7. for dual hoist/trolley Multiple wheels are calculated using the same logic for iteration. To simplify the calculations in the program.3) Equation 7.2: End reaction calculation. These choices approximate over 95% to 98% of most industrial overhead crane configurations in existence.2) Equation 7. to solve for maximum wheel load. the calculation was developed to limit to a choice of either two wheels or four wheels for the end truck. a single equation was used. utilizing a (# of hoists -1) multiplier to allow for a single or dual hoist application. (7.

5: Runway End truck loading diagram.6: Runway End truck loading diagram. (7. it is more traditional to utilize the equivalent center load (ECL) to determine the actual wheel loads Fig 7. eight wheel case Page | 29 . for the eight wheel bogie system. Fig 7.4) Equation 7.4: End reaction calculation as utilized in program for adjustment between single & dual hoist/trolley systems However. four wheel case ( ⁄ ) ( ) .the nullification of computing the further-distance loads of the second hoist if it is not present in the design.

Each region of the body is then calculated using a tabulated format: Region No. This is followed by establishing an axis of reference. For the girder section analysis. Using this method. one can calculate the inertial properties of a body.(7. The procedure starts with the division of a section into regions of simpler shapes (such as rectangles and squares).8: End reaction calculation for four-wheel (bogie) end trucks.5) ⁄ (7.8) ⁄ Equation 7. typically at the extrema of the compound section to be calculated. the method of built-up sections is used to develop optimized sectional shapes.7: Symbolic tabulation for calculation of cross-section properties Page | 30 Ixx Ixx1 Ixx2 Ixx Sum . The method of built-up sections is a means to calculate the inertial resistance of a body’s cross-section to deformation. and estimate the properties of a section that is not available in standard references. calculation of actual load for each wheel based on location This is reflected in the advanced 8 wheel runway analysis.6) ⁄ (7.7) ⁄ (7. 1 2 Area A1 A2 Dist Dy1 Dy2 Area*Dist A1*Dy1 A2*Dy2 Sum A Sum n/a A Sum * Dy Sum Area*Dist^2 A1*Dy1^2 A2*Dy2^2 A Sum * Dy Sum^2 Fig 7.5 .

1. Section modulus of cross-section Page | 31 (7. Total Cross-Sectional Area (7.9) ∑ 2. The fifth is the multiplication of the 1st column value by the 2nd column value squared 6.11) ∑ (7. The sixth is the region’s own moment of inertia. 13) . Cross-Section Moment of Inertia about the neutral axis ∑ ∑ 4. The second column is the region’s individual cross-sectional area 3. The first column is the regional division of the cross-section to be analyzed 2. Using the following equations: 1. Neutral Axis Location (as displaced from the reference axis) (7. The third is the distance from each region’s centroid to the axis of reference 4. The fourth is he multiplication of the 1st two column values for each region 5.12. with respect to its own centroidal axis of symmetry The summation of each column (with exception to the distance column) is required to solve for the combined section’s properties.10) ∑ 3.

Radius of Gyration (7.14: Calculations for Cross-Sectional Area. Solving for the basic stresses and deflection: Page | 32 . 26th Edition Built-up (or box) sections are generally used for longer spans. Section Modulus.14) √ Equation 7. Moment of Inertia. 7.8: Sample calculation using the method of sections.9 . Neutral axis location. from Machinery’s Handbook.5. and Radius of Gyration for Composite Cross-Sections using the Method of Built-Up Sections Fig. due to the need to conserve weight while maximizing inertial resistance to stress and deformation.

1.19) Page | 33 . The primary bending stress: For single hoist/trolley: (7.18) 3.17) 2. with p1 = p2 = 1/20 * (trolley weight + live load) (7.15) For dual hoist trolley: . The primary shear: (7. with P1 = P2 = ¼ * (trolley weight + live load) (7.16) Consolidated as a single equation: with P1 = P2 = 1/4 *(trolley weight + live load) (7. The secondary bending moment: Consolidated as a single equation: .

due to the runway generally consisting of simpler structures.15 . The torsional shear: 5. Examples of the basic loading/parameter and the advanced loading/parameter cases (for both the four and eight wheel systems) are found in the appendix (Entries A through D). Primary Bending Shear.21: Bending Moment/Stress calculation for single & dual hoist/trolley systems. However.4.20) (7. Page | 34 . the following procedure has been in-development. The loading calculations are.21) Equation 7. Torsional Shear and ASD Design Check calculations for girder analysis Continuing with the basics of runway structural/mechanical analysis. starting with the basic parameters for a four and eight-wheel system. in essence. Design Check: (7. there are a number of additional calculations and iterative checks to review. followed by the advanced development for each respective case. the same as those utilized on the girder sections.

Fatigue failure (estimated life of operation until failure – girder only) Considered Independent variables 1. Bridge Capacity 3. Speed of Trolley (@ maximum capacity) 6.8. Dynamic loading (estimated FOSy) a.11. Columns Spacing (centerline spacing under runway) Considered Dependent Variables 1. ASCE rail i. Maximum estimated wheel-load (@ maximum capacity @ maximum endapproach) 2. Seismic loading (estimated FOSy) 4. Lift Height Required 4. column. Permissible loads referenced in CMAA 70. Lowest Overhead Obstruction Height 7. Table 4. Static loading (standard FOSy) 2. base-plate) for different configurations: 1. Speed of Bridge (@ maximum capacity) 5. Allowable wheel-loads a. Span of Bridge 2. Solver Parameters Combination of Structural Calculations (girder. Using mean effective load factors to estimate cyclical loading variances 3.) Page | 35 . runway.3 (2004 ed.

Standard size diaphragm widths (manual selection) b. Bridge Moment Column Size based on ASD design criteria (to be featured in future iterations of the solver) 1. Provide selection chart for runway beam selection 8. Two wheel spacing as standard. Vertical compression b. Estimated deflection for runway beam 9. Square-bar rail 3. Allowable compression (Euler buckling) versus Actual compression Page | 36 . Traverse Moment e. Based on wheel-load and wheel-base only 5.b. Maximum allowable end-approach a. Provide selection chart for diaphragm selection 7. with additional wheels added if wheel-loads exceed allowable rating 4. Estimated plate sizes & stiffener requirements a. Bridge Shear d. Traverse Shear c. Ixx & Iyy required for bending resistances 6. ASD criteria b. Column translational forces & moments a. Estimated runway beam-size a. Wheel-base of bridge end-truck a.

Sigma y: ASTM A-36. Determine if gussets are required a. Sigma y (% yield allowed. AutoCAD drawings superimposed into spreadsheet format Page | 37 . CMAA criteria. Ixx required (@ minimum to meet stress criteria) 3. Tabulated drawings using standard views for approximate sizing a. AISC criteria) b. Based on beam selection size b. CMAA criteria. compression and traverse (simultaneously) c. Iyy required (@ minimum to meet stress criteria) 4. Allowable bridge bending moment a. Sigma y (% yield allowed.a. A-992 b. Charts for allowable compression 2. ASD design check (Sigmai actual / Sigmai allowed) a. Allowable traverse bending moment a. Selection charts to limit to “square” wide-flange beam (beam depth ~= base flange) 5. AISC criteria) b. compression and bridge (simultaneously) b. no bridge and traverse (two-tandem motions are restricted @ maximum capacity) Standard drawings for reference (responsibility of the designer to provide this data to the customer/end-user) 1. Ratio of Slenderness-to-radius of gyration (L/r) c. Ixx beam versus Ixx required (both orientations) c.

Capacity (LL) Page | 38 . Top b. Side 3. Values appear in dimension located as tabulated by program 2. Span (SP) 2. One standard three-set view for girder a. Top (Plan) view with no gusset required b.b. Two standard views for column base-plate a. Front c. One standard three-view set for column cell a. Front c. Estimated Hole sizing based on 4-bolt pattern & 8-bolt pattern ii. the following preliminary logic was developed for brainstorming of the implementation procedure: A listing of the Independent Parameters of the system: 1. Side 4. Top (Plan) view with gussets in highest bending moment orientation (typical traverse by default) i. Consider tubing if values exceed allotted stresses for standard “square” wide-flanges and gusset combinations For the development of the custom-based spreadsheets. Top b.

of the analysis: 1. Girder Weight (GR) 9. Iyy Girder (IyyG) 7. Minimum End-Approach (AP) 5. Calculated Deflection (DEL) 10. Ixx Runway (IxxR) 8. Lowest Obstruction (LO) 7. Trolley/Hoist Weight (TR) 10. or Outputs. Bridge Shear (VB) Page | 39 . Bridge Speed (VB) 5. Maximum Wheel-load (RM) 2. Lift Height (LH) 4. End-truck Weight (ET) 11. Allowable Wheel-load (RA) 3. Column Spacing (CS) 8. Beam Weight (BW) The Dependent Variables.3. Runway End-Reaction (RE) 11. Ixx Girder (IxxG) 6. Trolley Speed (VT) 6. Trolley Shear (VT) 13. Wheel-base (WB) 4. Iyy Runway (IyyR) 9. Vertical Compression (VC) 12.

Solving for AP yields: Page | 40 . Runway Bending Moment (MR) 17. per AISC & CMAA design criterion Calculations to determine basis design parameters:  Determining Minimum End-Approach from Allowable Wheel-load: RA = ½ * [ ½ * (ET + GR) + (SP-AP)/SP * (LL + TR) ]. Bending Moment Stress (ys ) Figure 8.14. Trolley Bending Moment (MT) 15.1: Early samples of runway calculation loading and reaction parameters. Bridge Bending Moment (MB) 16.

AP = SP – SP/(LL + TR) * [ 2*RA – ½ * (ET + GR) ]; with RM/RA <= 1.0

For Beam Loading (Direction of Primary Deflection):
MR = ¼ * BW * (CS – WB) + ½ * RM * (CS – WB) + ¼ * BW * WB;
with RM = ½ * [ ½ * (ET + GR) + (SP – AP)/SP * (LL + TR) ];

Bending Moment Stress (Direction of Primary Deflection):
bR = MR*c/IxxR = c/IxxR * [¼ * BW * (CS – WB) + ½ * RM * (CS – WB) + ¼ * BW

* WB ];
Solving for IxxR yields:
IxxRmin= c/bR * [¼ * BW * (CS – WB) + ½ * RM * (CS – WB) + ¼ * BW * WB ];

Using Lightest Weight of Beam to optimize selection: (IxxR vs. BW)

(*) Use True/False Criteria for Selection (IF-ELSE loop, all three to be FALSE to
stop iteration)
IxxRn+1 - IxxRn >= 0; next iteration of beam has higher Ixx value
WBn+1 - WBn <= 0; next iteration of beam has lower weight
%ys >= c/IxxRn * [¼ * BW * (CS – WB) + ½ * RM * (CS – WB) + ¼ * BW * WB ]
bending resistance of beam does not let bending stress exceed allowable.
(*) Use all three at FALSE to optimize selection for runway and/or girder.

Page | 41

To solve for beam optimization, nest IF-ELSE loops by:

1. %ys
2. IxxRn+1 - IxxRn
3. WBn+1 - WBn

For Beam Loading (Direction of Secondary Deflection):
MQ = 0.05 * (TR + LL) * (CS – WB) ;

Bending Moment Stress (Direction of Secondary Deflection):
bQ = MQ*c/IyyR = c/IyyR * [0.05 * (TR + LL) * (CS – WB)];

Solving for IyyR yields:
IyyRmin= c/bQ * [0.05 * (TR + LL) * (CS – WB)];
Using Lightest Weight of Beam to optimize selection: (IyyR vs. BW)
(*) Use True/False Criteria for Selection (IF-ELSE loop, all three to be FALSE to
stop iteration)
IyyRn+1 - IyyRn >= 0; next iteration of beam has higher Ixx value
WBn+1 - WBn <= 0; next iteration of beam has lower weight
%ys >= c/IyyRn * [0.05 * (TR + LL) * (CS – WB)]
bending resistance of beam does not let bending stress exceed allowable
(*) Use all three at FALSE to optimize selection for runway and/or girder.
Page | 42

To solve for beam optimization, nest IF-ELSE loops by:

1. %ys
2. IyyRn+1 - IyyRn
3. WBn+1 - WBn

Stresses of Concern:

1. Bx

(primary moment bending)

2. Bx

(primary bending shear)

3. By

(secondary moment bending)

4. By

(secondary bending shear)

5. z

(torsional shear)

6. Rc

(rail compression, wheel-load)

Bx = MR * cx/Ixx; MR = primary bending moment

Bx = 3/2 * Vx/Acs ; Vx = primary bending shear, Acs = area of structural crosssection

By = MQ * cy/Iyy; MQ = secondary bending moment

By = 3/2 * Vy/Acs ; Vy = secondary bending shear

z = Mz * r/Izz = 1/Izz * [RT*nx*ny – QT*ny2 ]; RT = trolley wheel-load, QT =
trolley thrust-load, nx = distance to x-x neutral axis, ny = distance to y-y neutral
axis, Izz = Ixx + Iyy

Rc = RT/AR = RT/RB * 1 /[2*(RH + TPt) + 2]; RB = base-width of rail, RH = height
of rail, TPt = top-plate thickness

Page | 43

to allow for multiple embedded “IF-ELSE” loops to properly sort and optimize to solution. Page | 44 . those which will be developed in higher-level programming languages (such as Visual BASIC®).*This material will be added to future iterations of the solver.

which serves as a common utility for many designers and engineers in the creation of accessible analytical software modules. and the variable geometric and loading/reaction parameters of each section is dependent on the others. These pages feature developed procedural examples of the calculation algorithm that has been developed for the crane analysis/optimization program.where the system is modeled as a whole. the required girder span.9.1: Table 1. Data entry of girder cross-section sizing and required span The input variables consist of the following (as noted. utilizing Microsoft Excel® as a starting point for the basic development of the program. and a chance to create a more cost-effective structure for the industrial crane design. From these models. For the 1st section of the calculation process. Solver Development Updates to the programming led to the following development. This interweaving of the design analysis allows for a better development of global optimization. an indication of basic girder sizing and parameters must be made. a state of continuity is developed . This is done by the user entering the data for the plate sizes of the different sections of the girder. The datasheets are developed as individual calculations. all sizing is in Imperial inches): Page | 45 . spacing between plates. and sizes of longitudinal stiffener angles. as shown in table (1): Fig 9.

top plate width (tw) b. rail width (rb) h.a. rail height (rh) i. adjusted automatically if stiffeners are required to: 0. web plate 1 height (h) g. stiffener leg 1 length (s4) k. girder span (L. in inches – even with most spans being verified in foot-inch lengths) p.4 * h j. web plate 1 thickness (t1) f. stiffener leg 2 length (s2) l. distance between end of girder & centerline of span (dist). web centerline offset (for adjustment for non-symmetrical boxes) o. stiffener leg thickness (s3) m. bottom plate width (bw) d. stiffener elevation (s1) a. required moment of inertia for stiffeners (if necessary) and current moment of inertia value for configured stiffener Page | 46 . space btw diaphragm and bottom plate (to account for estimated diaphragm sizing for proper weight calculations) r. to adjust for actual box length q. top plate thickness (c1) c. distance between inside of web plates (dw) n. bottom plate thickness (c2) e.

3.5. Page | 47 . For simplicity. it is assumed that the web plates are symmetrical and identical in most calculations. distance between diaphragm plates (a) = (average of) 60 inches ii. Alerts are integrated to allow the user to know if the stiffener meets CMAA criterion established in Section 70.1. Area of stiffener (As) = (s4 * s3) + (s3 * (s2 – s3)) Fig 9. depth of girder (h) = h iii.a.3.5.1.1 i. since they contribute more to the cross-sectional inertial resistance.3. thickness of web plates (t) = t1 iv. as that the finer control of crosssectional properties comes from adjusting the top & bottom plates. required sizing for Longitudinal Stiffeners for Girder Cross-Section These variables are illustrated (for the most part) in the reference diagram shown below.3.2: Section 70. indicative of the standard configuration for the majority of box girders fabricated by crane companies.1.

and other values of interest. composite crosssectional area. as referenced in section 7 of this paper.3: Table 1 reference image of girder cross-section and corresponding regions and dimensions The data from this point of entry is then processed within two tabulations. 9. to compute the necessary values to calculate the moments of inertia. These tables are composites of the method of built-up sections. Page | 48 .Fig.

leg 1 = Stiffener 1. Web plate 1 = h * t1 c.Fig 9. Stiffener 1. leg 1 (symmetry) Page | 49 . for Table 2 (Ix): a. leg 2 = s2 * s3 h. calculations for the Ix (strong-axis) inertial resistance of the cross-section Fig 9. Stiffener 1.5: Table 3. Area of region (A) = plate width * plate thickness a. Rail = rb * rh f.4: Table 2. Bottom plate = bw * c2 b. leg 1 = s4 * s3 g. where the properties of the composite regions are calculated according to the following equations. Web plate 2 = web plate 1 (symmetry) e. Stiffener 2. calculations for the Iy (weak-axis) inertial resistance of the cross-section All input values come directly from table 1. Top plate = tw * c1 d.

Stiffener 1. leg 2 (symmetry) b. leg 2 = 1/12 * s3 * (s2-s3) ^3 h. leg 2 = Stiffener 1. The regional moments of inertia are calculated according to the base formula for rectangular cross-sections (Ixx) = 1/12 * base * height ^3 a. leg 2 = c2 + h – s1 + s3 + ½ * (s2-s3) h. Bottom plate = ½ * c2 b. Web plate 1= 1/12 * t1 * (h) ^3 c. The centroid distance from reference axis (Dy) = distance from bottom of girder (where extrema is located) to the regional center (centroid) of the area in calculation a. leg 1 = 1/12 * s4 * (s3) ^3 g. Rail = c2 + h + c1 + ½ * rh f. leg 1 = c2 + h – s1+ ½ * s3 g. Stiffener 2. Top Plate = 1/12 * tw * (c1) ^3 d. leg 2 (symmetry) c. Web Plate 1 = c2 + ½ *h c.i. Rail = 1/12* rb * (rh) ^3 f. Stiffener 2. Web plate 2 = web plate 1 (symmetry) e. leg 1 (symmetry) Page | 50 . Stiffener 1. Stiffener 2. leg 1 = Stiffener 1. leg 1 = Stiffener 1. Stiffener 1. Web plate 2 = web plate 1 (symmetry) e. Top Plate = c2 + h + ½ * c1 d. Bottom plate = 1/12 * bw * (c2) ^3 b. Stiffener 1. Stiffener 2. leg 1 (symmetry) i. leg 2 = Stiffener 1.

leg 1 = ½ * bw + ½ * dw .n e. if required d. Top Plate = ½ * tw + (offset).n b. leg 2 = ½ * bw + ½ * dw – s4 + ½ * s3 h. away from the rail location): a.½ * dw + ½ * s4 Page | 51 . i = 1. Stiffener 2. leg 2 = Stiffener 1. Area * dist = Ai * Dyi . leg 1 = ½ * bw .½ * s4 g. i = 1.½ * t1 e. with the extrema being located on the far-side of the girder (far right as drawn. Stiffener 2. Stiffener 1. as required for the calculation of the various cross-sectional properties These calculations are repeated for Table 3 (Iy). Stiffener 1.. and for greatest stress resistance) f. The sums of each of these respective calculations are listed in the “total” region. Area of region (A) = plate width * plate thickness a. Web Plate 1 = ½ * bw + ½ * dw + ½ * t1 c. Bottom plate = ½ * bw b. Web plate 2 = ½ * bw . Rail = web plate 1 (by simplicity of design. leg 2 (symmetry) d. Area * dist * dist = Ai * Dyi 2. The centroid distance from reference axis (Dx) = distance from right of girder (where extrema is located) to the regional center (centroid) of the area in calculation a. All other values are calculated according to the formulas noted below (in index notation) a.½ * dw ..i. All values same as for Table 2 (Ix) calculations b.

½ * dw + s4 . i = 1.i. Bottom plate = 1/12 * c2 * (bw) ^3 b. leg 1 = 1/12 * s3 * (s4) ^3 g.. as required for the calculation of the various cross-sectional properties Page | 52 . Top Plate = 1/12 * c1 * (tw) ^3 d.n d. The sums of each of these respective calculations are listed in the “total” region. Stiffener 2. leg 2 = ½ * bw . leg 1 (symmetry) f. The regional moments of inertia are calculated according to the base formula for rectangular cross-sections (Iyy) = 1/12 * height * base ^3 a. leg 2 = 1/12 * (s2-s3) * (s3) ^3 h. leg 1 = Stiffener 1. Web plate 2 = web plate 1 (symmetry) e. Stiffener 2. Rail = 1/12* rh * (rb) ^3 f. Area * dist * dist = Ai * Dxi 2.. Area * dist = Ai * Dxi . i = 1.½ * s3 c. All other values are calculated according to the formulas noted below (in index notation) a. Stiffener 1. Stiffener 1. Web plate 1= 1/12 * h * (t1) ^3 c.n b.

The distance to the neutral axis. from the girder top (nx2) = d .n c.From this table.∑ Ai *nx2 e.284 lbs/cubic in) * (1ft/ 12 in) b. based on permissible loading/stresses/ratios.6: Table 4. Sectional properties of composite cross-section. The area of the cross section (A) = ∑Ai . The moment of inertia for the strong axis (Ix) = ∑(Ai *Dyi2) + ∑Ixxi . a. i = 1. The associated output variables of this table consists of: a. The estimated linear weight of the girder (Wt) = Area of the cross-section (A) * density of steel (0. based on the girder bottom (Sx1) = Ix / nx1 g.. The depth of the girder (d) = c1 + h + c2 +rh d. Fig 9. The distance to the neutral axis. and design checks for minimum values.nx1 Page | 53 . the cross-sectional properties of the composite cross-section are calculated. The modulus of the section. from the girder bottom (nx1) = ∑(Ai *Dyi)/∑ Ai f.

The modulus of the section. Not to exceed 25. These ratios help to ensure that the girders have a good measure of inertial resistance in all directions.h. limiting undesired performance in the beams during operation. else the use of longitudinal stiffeners is required a. from the side opposite the rail (ny) = ∑(Ai *Dxi)/∑ Ai l. such as buckling. Not to exceed 65. Not to exceed 200. based on the girder top (Sx2) = Ix / nx2 i. Span: Beam Depth Ratio = L (in inches)/d. Span: Inside Webs Ratio = L (in inches) / dw. Integrated alerts are present with the design checks to enable the user to know if the values are okay. bouncing. as best as possible c. The radius of gyration. of the weak axis (ry) = Iy / ∑ Ai The design check ratios are based on geometric allowances given in CMAA 70. of the strong axis (rx) = Ix / ∑ Ai j. The distance to the neutral axis. The allowances are as noted: a. and rolling.∑ Ai *ny2 k. Web Height: Web Thickness Ratio = h / t1. based on the side opposite the rail (Sy) = Iy / ny m. The moment of inertia for the weak axis (Iy) = ∑(Ai *Dxi2) + ∑Iyyi . as best as possible b. or in need of adjustment accordingly Page | 54 . The modulus of the section. The radius of gyration.

length of L – 2*dist d. Two top plates: width and thickness as given. This limits the quantities of plates to: a. the quantities. Two bottom plates: width and thickness as given. = (L – 2*dist)/60. which is entered in the following table. In this table. spacing.7: Table 5. Fig 9. Four web plates: height and thickness as given.The minimum allowable values are based on the loading data for the crane. This is currently configured for a traditional top-running double-box assembly. length of L – 2*dist b. qty. as that accounts for the majority of high-capacity top-running cranes in existence. Girder Diaphragms: internal spacers placed at 5 foot intervals. Structural configuration of the crane’s bridge and the operational hoist/trolleys. length of L – 2*dist c. and weights of the crane components are calculated. The equations used to calculate these values will be provided later in the section. quantity is calculated using. raised to the next whole number Page | 55 .

End-approach (a) of 1st trolley’s outermost wheel to center of span/runway c. quantities and weights (TR) i. as will be explained later in the section. This is required for proper runway design. length = (L-2*dist + end truck length) / 12 h. in the worst loading case possible (maximum loading at minimum spacing between wheels and support). each trolley is assumed to have the same wheelbase b. length of L . each trolley is assumed to have the same capacity e. Distance between near/inside wheels (di1). The spacing dimension required consists of: a. Hoist/trolley assemblies. Trolley wheelbase (wb1). Lifted load of each trolley (LL). The end truck wheelbase (wb2). for bogie (or 8 wheel) end trucks only Page | 56 . Two rails: width and height as given.e. Paint and Weld adder: based on linear distance of one full girder and one full end truck assembly. for two trolleys on single bridge d.3*dist f. All other quantities of structural components are as determined by the designer The calculation also requires the spacing available between the wheels for the hoist/trolleys and the end trucks. Four end-stops: lengths required determined by the designer g. This is done to calculate the maximum generated end truck wheel-load.

OWL = MWL / (1+ (½*di2 + wb2)/ ½*di2) Page | 57 . The full-bridge weight (FBW). based on the girder cross-section sizing and component configuration The resultant weight consists of: a. for bogie end trucks only The results of the values entered/calculated in Table 5 are shown in the resultant table. The outer/outside wheel-load (OWL) for a bogie (8 wheel) end truck a. As referenced in Equation 7. The distance between near/inside wheels (di2). MWL = ¼ * FBW + ¼*(TR + LL)*(1/L)*(L-a + L-a-wb1 + (# hoists -1) * L-a-wb1-di1 + (# hoists -1)* L-a-wb1-di1-wb1) b. The maximum wheel-load (MWL) for the traditional four-wheel end truck a. Fig 9. 4 d. the crane assembly without hoist/trolleys a.8: Table 6. the crane assembly with hoist/trolleys a.f. the resultant weights and wheel-loads values. Table 6. FBW = ∑(Weight/Total of Items 1 to 19) b. FCW = ∑(Weight/Total of Items 1 to 20) c. The full crane weight (FCW).

(1+ (½*di2 + wb2)/ ½*di2))) b. Design Check for Girder CrossSection/Girder Loading Stress calculations are compliant to required structural safety factors per CMAA Section 70. 18 to 19) /2 + ∑ (Weight/Total of Item 16) g. hoist/trolley. IGW = ∑(Weight/Total of Items 1 to 12. and linear weight) are provided. as given or calculated in earlier tables. The weight of the idler girder (IGW) a. The weight of the drive girder (DGW) a.9: Table 7.8 f. Stress Calculations. 18 to 19) /2 + ∑ (Weight/Total of Items 13 to 15) h. DGW = ∑(Weight/Total of Items 1 to 12. The table entries/resultants are as follows: Page | 58 . All others weights (end truck. Girder Deflection. As referenced in Equation 7. The inner/inside wheel-load (IWL) for a bogie (8 wheel) end truck a. IWL = MWL / (1 . shown only for references Fig 9.b.6 e. As referenced in Equation 7.

due to lower magnitude in comparison to other forces/moments d. As referenced in Equation 7.18 f. Secondary bending shear is ignored.# hoists*wb1 . The primary shear (Vp) = MWL. The torsional shear stress (τr) = Tr * nx2 / (Ixx + Iyy) Page | 59 . The secondary moment (Ms) = 1/20 * (TR + LL) * ½ * (L . The bending shear stress (τp) = Vp / A a. The secondary bending stress (σs) = Ms * ny1 / Iy = Ms / Sy1 h.# hoists*wb1 . The rotational torsion (Tr) = 1/20 * (TR + LL) * nx2 * (# hoists / 2) a. As referenced in Equation 7.# hoists*di1) + # hoists *1/20 * (TR + LL) * ½ * (L – wb1 – di1) c. As referenced in Equation 7. due to lower magnitude in comparison to other stresses i.18 g. The primary moment (Mp) = ¼ * FBW * ½ * L + ¼ * (TR + LL) * ½ * (L .19 b. Secondary bending shear stress is ignored.# hoists*di1) + # hoists * ¼ * (TR + LL) * ½ * (L – wb1 – di1) a. The primary bending stress in compression (σp) = Mp * nx2 / Ix = Mp / Sx2 a.20 e. as this load is seen at each end of girder in the maximum loading case a. The primary bending stress in tension (σp) = Mp * nx1 / Ix = Mp / Sx1 a. As referenced in Equation 7.a.18 b. As referenced in Equation 7.

500. formulae for simple beam bending. Where modulus of elasticity of steel (E) = 30. For the dead load (runway beam members). a distributed-loading calculation is used: a. L = span of girder (in inches) b. b = a + (# hoists – 1) * wb1 Page | 60 . symmetrical loading for a distributed load (runway dead load).000. a = L – wb1 – (# hoists -1) * di1 – (# hoists -1) * wb1 c. Distance from girder support to 2nd wheel load (b) – for 2 hoist/trolley case only: i.j. Distance from girder support to 1st wheel load (a): i.000 lb/in2 The girder deflection calculation comes from the ASD 9th edition. Δx = (5/384 * Wt * (L^4)) / (E* Ix) i. The angle of twist under torsion (°) = (180/π) * (Tr * L) / (2 * G *(Ixx + Iyy)) a.000 lb/in2 b. the trolley wheel loads as symmetrical-spaced point loads are used: a. Δx = ((1/24 * ¼*(TR + LL) * a *(3* L ^2 + 4*a ^2)) / (E* Ix)) + (# hoists-1)*((1/24 * ¼*(TR + LL) * b *(3* L ^2 + 4*a ^2)) / (E* Ix)) b. For the applied lifted loads. For the vertical loading (in direction of gravity and primary bending): a. plus symmetrical loading for a two-point loading on a single member. Where shear modulus of elasticity of steel (G) = 11.

Permissible Deflection is calculated. For the applied lifted loads. plus 1/2 of the lifted-load rating For the horizontal loading (perpendicular to gravity and in the direction of secondary bending): a. for all possible stresses of design failure for a particular loading. based on a direct correlation to runway span: a. Δxall = L / 400 The stress design check consists of checking the case of combined stresses . Permissible Deflection is calculated. Page | 61 .where the summation of the ratios of maximum stress-to-allowable stress. for cambered sections. the trolley wheel loads as symmetrical-spaced point loads are used: a. Δx = ((1/24 *1/20 *(TR + LL) * a *(3* L ^2 + 4*a ^2)) / (E* Ix)) + (# hoists-1)*((1/24 * 1/20 *(TR + LL) * b *(3* L ^2 + 4*a ^2)) / (E* Ix)) i. Δxall = L / 888. based on a direct correlation to runway span: a. must be less than unity to be considered acceptable. The distances (a & b) are calculated the same as for the vertical loading b. Minimum camber required is based upon the deflection of the deadload. These sections have curvature built into the structure to negate dead-loads of the supported structure b.c.

Page | 62 .

generally a concern for single web members only – as shown in the runway section of the calculation procedure) c. based upon girder cross-section’s inertial resistance and crane configuration are calculated in Tables 7 & 8. Stress calculations. and all secondary) = 0. or rotational moments) = 0. couples. for the girder cross-section to be considered acceptable for calculated loading case.35 * σys a. Tensile Bending stresses (primarily due to loading. Shear stresses (due to bending.6 * σys b.The following stress values are considered the maximum allowable (or permissible) per CMAA Section 70 for structural members: a.35 * σys For the design check: sp/ 0. (mainly in top-flange.6 * σys + τp / 0.6 * σys + ss/ 0. and all secondary) = 0.35 * σys + τr / 0. Page | 63 .35 * σys <= 1. Compressive Bending stresses (primarily due to loading.

Eight-Point Stress Calculation/Check for Strong & Weak Axis Bending Stresses. Shear Stresses & Combined Stresses for Selected Girder Cross-Section The eight-point cross-section check is intended to serve as a means of checking stresses across the box seams. where the welds are most crucial to maintaining crosssectional integrity. and the outer flanges directly above and below the web plates.10: Table 8.Fig 9. The primary points of checking are the four outer seams (where external arc welding takes place). catastrophic failure is imminent. in that all loading and deformation is distributed from the web directly into the plates at these locations. and if failure takes place at one of these spots. Page | 64 . These spots are crucial.

11: Fig 9. a point calculation is made for the primary bending stress (σp). Di = distance from the reference neutral axis of the cross-section (nx) c. and the secondary shear stress (τs). Mx = maximum primary bending moment b.11: Dimensional Reference Diagram for Eight-Point Stress Calculation for Selected Girder Cross-Section At each of these locations.The locations are illustrated in Figure 9. Ix = moment of inertia for strong axis Page | 65 . the following relationships are used: a. and the secondary bending stress (σs). For each location. a point calculation is made for the primary shear stress (τp). In addition. Primary bending stress (σpi) = Mx * (Di) / Ix a.

Secondary shear stress (tsi) = Vy * (Ai) * di / Iy * bi a. di = distance from the reference neutral axis of the cross-section (ny) d. Di = distance from the reference neutral axis of the cross-section (nx) d. di = distance from the reference neutral axis of the cross-section (ny) c.2 * MWL b. Page | 66 . Iy = moment of inertia for weak axis e. Secondary bending stress (σsi) = My * (di) / Iy a. Iy = moment of inertia for weak axis c. Ai = cross-sectional area of the region of the location of shear (web of girder) c. Primary shear stress (tpi) = Vx * (Ai) * Di / Ix * bi a. bi = thickness of cross-section region where point is located (along the reference neutral axis) d. My = maximum secondary bending moment b. Ai = cross-sectional area of the region of the location of shear (top/bottom flange) c. Vx = primary shear force = MWL b. Vy = secondary shear force = 0. Ix = moment of inertia for strong axis e. bi = thickness of cross-section region where point is located (along the reference neutral axis) Stresses are summed according to type (bending & shear) and then are added vectorally to a final combined stress resultant.b.

Where k = the combined spring stiffness of the crane members b. is used to rate the fundamental frequency of the girder cross-section: Fig 9. Where m = the mass of the crane Page | 67 .12: Table 9.6 *σys (recommended is 0. the cross-section is sufficient for the loading configuration. listed in Table 9. The frequency response considers only the dead weight of the crane (structural and mechanical members only). Frequency Response of Girders to Vertical and Horizontal Excitation The fundamental frequency of the crane is based upon the corresponding spring stiffness of each member. it does not account for the addition of lifted loads into the calculation. The frequency check.5 *σys.6 *σys is calculated. Combined Stresses (∑i) = ((σpi + σsi) ^2 + (tpi + tsi) ^2) ^(1/2) A design check against maximum permissible combined stresses of 0. which is a function of the cross-sectional properties of the girder. The natural frequency of a simply supported member is denoted as: a. As long as the values are not allowed to exceed 0. to account for amplification and impact factors). Omega = (k /m) ^ (1/2) a.a.

L = span of the girder d. Mass (m) = the FCW/gc a. for the supported girder member a. 20% of the FBW is used (in lieu of a more complicated dynamic analysis c.4 Hz is required by CMAA Section 70 for most members. A minimum of 2.000. but anything above 2 Hz is generally considered acceptable in most seismic loading zones (Zones 0 & 1) Page | 68 .b. For the vertical excitation. For the horizontal excitation. The girders operate in parallel. keq = k1*k2 / (k1 + k2) = 2304 * E * Ixx / (L ^3) e. the FBW is used c.000 psi) b. Spring stiffness (k) = 4608*E*Ixx/ (L ^3). Ixx = moment of inertia for strong axis c. so the resultant equivalent spring stiffness (keq) is: a. Where E = modulus of elasticity of steel (30. Where gc = gravitational constant (32.2 ft/sec/sec) b.

The girder weight = FCW b. Wheelbase 1 = distance between end truck wheels on either side of the bridge Page | 69 . Bogie (eight-wheel) end truck crane configuration parameters These two tables provide for data entry and carry-over from the previous girder analysis. Traditional (four-wheel) end truck crane configuration parameters Fig 9. Starting with either the parameter entry for Table 10: Fig 9.The runway analysis is the second part of the calculation that is required for a proper structural crane analysis.13. 14: Table 10(a/b). Table 10= MWL c. where for the four-wheel case: a. Wheel Load 1 & 2.15: Table 11.

so Wheelbase 1 = Wheelbase 2 in the majority of cases e. corresponding to moderate loadings. The girder weight = FCW b. The impact factor is used to estimate dynamic impact upon the runway. moderate shocks c. corresponding to heavy loadings. It is accurately calculated using an acceleration multiplier for hoist motion versus gravitational acceleration – but is easier to assume as a straight percentage of the lifted load for most cases.For the eight-wheel case: a. 25% . light shocks b. heavy shocks Page | 70 . 15%. Most manufacturers use the same wheelbase on both trucks for simplicity. Insider Wheel Load 1 & 2 = IWL d. due to snatching and dropping of loads. corresponding to light loadings. Wheelbase 1 = distance between end truck wheels on either side of the bridge. It defaults to three selections in this program: a. 10%. Outside Wheel Load 1 & 2 = OWL c.

Beam depth. and beam properties Selection of the runway beam comes from a table of the most-commonly used sections in the industry. Fig 9. Information for beam properties consists of: a. the dimension of the beam in the plane of the strong axis c.16: Table 12. The strong axis section modulus (Sx) = Ixx/ (1/2 * d) Page | 71 . the overall dimension of the beam from top of flange to bottom of flange b.For the selection of the runway members. The thickness of the base flange d. cell length. selection of runway beam. The weak axis moment of inertia (Iyy) f. The thickness of the web of the beam. Tables 12 through 14 are used to configure a desired cross-section. Base flange width. the member connecting the two flanges together e. The weak axis radius of gyration (kyy) = (Iyy / A) ^ 1/2 h. The weak axis section modulus (Sy) = Iyy/ (1/2 * d) g. The strong axis moment of inertia (Ixx) i.

commonly used after the year 2000 Fig 9. 36. Channel depth. in lbs/foot of length l. The cross-sectional area (A) m.17: Table 13. the dimension of the channel in the plane of the strong axis Page | 72 . Channel flange width. and cap properties Selection of the channel cap comes from a table of the most-commonly used sections in the industry. Information for cap properties consists of: a. selection of runway channel cap. The linear density of the beam (LDb).000 psi A-36 beams. commonly used before the year 2000 b.j.000 psi A-441 & A-992 alloy beams. 50. the overall dimension of the channel from top of flange to bottom of flange b. with the most commonly used section being rated at: a. The weight of the beam = LDb * length of cell Included in the selection is the yield strength. The strong axis radius of gyration (kxx) = (Ixx / A) ^ 1/2 k.

so a selection of “No Cap” is available to provide null values for those properties in the calculations. as that the runway beam is the true load-bearing member. in lbs/foot of length l. The weak axis moment of inertia (Iyy) f. The thickness of the web of the channel. selection of runway rectangular rail.18: Table 14. In many applications. The strong axis radius of gyration (kxx) = (Ixx / A) ^ 1/2 k. The strong axis section modulus (Sx) = Ixx/ (1/2 * d) j.c. The strong axis moment of inertia (Ixx) i. The linear density of the channel (LDc). and capping is often used to increase the sectional properties of a beam to offset deformation and stress. the member connecting the two flanges together e. The weight of the channel = LDc * length of cell The alloy of the channel cap is generally assumed to be the same as that of the beam (or in many cases ignored). The thickness of the base flange d. a channel cap is not used. The weak axis radius of gyration (kyy) = (Iyy / A) ^ 1/2 h. The weak axis section modulus (Sy) = Iyy/ (1/2 * d) g. and rail properties Page | 73 . Fig 9. The cross-sectional area (A) m.

The weight of the rail = LDr * length of cell As with the channel cap. The cross-sectional area (A) h. as that the runway beam is the true load-bearing member. This allows for higher compressive and torsional resistance at a lower weight. Page | 74 . Rail height b. Future additions of the program will incorporate tabulated selections of commonly-used rail sizes for improved performance. Rail width c. The strong axis radius of gyration (kxx) = (Ixx / A) ^ 1/2 f. this rail can be modeled as a rectangular bar. in lieu of the high number of sections currently available on the market. The strong axis moment of inertia (Ixx) a. and the rail is mainly a means to confine the traverse of the bridge to the direction of propagation of the runway beam. and the ability to replace the rail as wear occurs. In many applications. Only the strong axis is considered.Configuration of the runway rail comes from a simple configurator used to size sections based on common bar sizes. For simplicity. runway rail consists of forged rail rather than bar. Information for the rail consists of: a. The strong axis section modulus (Zxx) = Ixx/ (1/2 * d) e. as that the rail contributes little to the weak axis moment of inertia for the composite section d. in lbs/foot of length g. The linear density of the rail (LDr). the alloy of the rail is generally assumed to be the same as that of the beam (or in many cases ignored).

and design checks for minimum values. The moment of inertia for the strong axis (Ix) = ∑(Ai *Dyi2) + ∑Ixxi . The distance to the neutral axis. i = 1. based on the runway top (Sx2) = Ix / nx2 Page | 75 .19: Table 15. a.nx1 h.. from the runway top (nx2) = d . The modulus of the section.n c.∑ Ai *nx2 e. The distance to the neutral axis. based on permissible loading/stresses.284 lbs/cubic in) * (1ft/ 12 in) b. The estimated linear weight of the girder (Wt) = Area of the cross-section (A) * density of steel (0. from the runway bottom (nx1) = ∑(Ai *Dyi)/∑ Ai f. The depth of the runway beam (D) = c1 + h + c2 +rh d. The associated output variables of this table consists of: a. Sectional properties of composite cross-section. The area of the cross section (A) = ∑Ai . akin to what was used in the girder analysis: Fig 9. The modulus of the section. based on the runway bottom (Sx1) = Ix / nx1 g. using the method of built-up sections.The properties of the resultant runway cross-section are tabulated in Table 15.

Generally located at the center of the section. Calculated using the sum of the tabulated values for each crosssectional region of the runway m. of the strong axis (rx) = Ix / ∑ Ai j. of the weak axis (ry) = Iy / ∑ Ai Two of the primary design checks used in the analysis of the runway section are the single web buckling calculation and the top-flange compression stress allowance.∑ Ai *ny2 k. The distance to the neutral axis. The radius of gyration. The modulus of the section. from the edge of the beam flange (ny) = ∑(Ai *Dxi)/∑ Ai a. due to symmetrical configuration l. as referenced from “Handbook of Structural Engineering” Page | 76 . The radius of gyration. Design Check for Buckling of Single-Web Members. based on the edge of the beam flange (Sy) = Iy / ny a.20: Table 16.i. The moment of inertia for the weak axis (Iy) = ∑(Ai *Dxi2) + ∑Iyyi . The single web buckling calculation is shown in Table 16: Fig 9.

creating a buckle (or folding) of the web between the location of compression and the support of the member. to the point where catastrophic failure (fracture) will most likely occur with continued use. intermittent diaphragms. This shift results in the misalignment of the member. in that the buckled member is plastically-deformed.Buckling is the phenomenon where compressive loading upon a members leads to a deformational shift of the member along the axis of compression. and the loading capacity of a buckled member is severely-reduced. Fig 9. the primary means to safeguard against web buckling are: a. This is a critical failure. providing additional members to transfer compressive stresses from the rail flange to the support flange without full-use of the web Page | 77 .21: The Basic Buckling Element A case to be avoided at all cost.

85 * (Cr * (tw ^3) * tf * (Dw) ^-2)*(1 + 0.3. and the beam is restrained against rotation (rigidly supported) a. reducing the likelihood of web buckling c. longitudinal stiffeners. As referenced in the Load Resistance Factor Design Guide (LRFD). Cr = adjustment factor (480. load limiting/de-rating. My = the yield moment (where stresses cause onset plastic deformation in the beam) Page | 78 .000 if Mu/My >=1) 1. permissible wheel load = 0. L = length of the cell (beam) d. tw = thickness of the web c.000 if Mu/My < 1. Web Check Ratio (R)= (Dw/tw) * (L/bf) ^ -1 a. and safeguard against web buckling This design check allows the user to determine the maximum permissible wheel load for the configured runway. Mu = highest bending moment in beam section 2. to increase the cross-section’s inertial resistance. Dw = depth of the web (D – 2 *tw) b. and lower the neutral axis closer to the support flange.b.4 *(R^3)) i. For values of the ratio < 2. limiting the permissible loads that the runway beam will have the carry. Max. and based upon the ratio of: a. without having to add diaphragms or stiffeners to improve the section. bf = width of the base flange b. 960.

the material properties of current beams is of a higher strength than past A36 beams. For modern sections.S.3).5.c. For values of the ratio < 1.4 *(R^3)) d.000 / (L*D) / (Af). and the beam is not restrained against rotation (simply supported) a. Af = area of the base flange = bf * tf + Ac (Area of channel cap) b. Design Check for Top Flange Compression of Single-Web Members. sc all = 12.7.3. D = depth of the beam c.22: Table 17. in units of kips/sq. permissible wheel load = 0. so the main concern is the ratio (if R < 2. The top flange compression check for single-web member is shown in Table 17: Fig 9. For most runway beams.85 * (Cr * (tw ^3) * tf * (Dw) ^2)*(0. Max. whether the wheel load falls into the acceptable range. the use of runway diaphragms or longitudinal stiffeners is required section is required. 9th Edition” & CMAA Section 70. So in Page | 79 . L = length of the cell (beam) b.C Allowable Stress Design.in a. with the principal alloy being A992.7 Based upon the equation: a. the runway is rigidly supported.I. as referenced from “A. And if it is under the value for checking. If not.

then another section is recommended to safeguard against flange failure For the traditional (4-wheel) single loading crane configuration. in units of lbs/in2 c. sc all = (1/3) * sys / (L*D) / (Af). the resultant loading data is given in Table 18: Fig 9. The compressive stresses calculated are the vector sum of the primary bending stress & the secondary bending stress a. Single loading (4 wheel) resultant runway loads/stresses/design check/deflection Page | 80 . in units of kips/in2 i. sys = yield strength of the material. an adjustment is used: a. If the bending compression exceeds this permissible value. sc = {(Mx / Sx2)^2 + (My / Sy2)^2} ^ (1/2) d.23: Table 18.consideration of the ratio of allowable –to-yield for compression being 1:3 in the A36 beam.

a = 1st wheel location. The maximum horizontal reactions. as referenced from the left-hand support (per classic beam-bending theory) a. due to motion of the bridge assembly d. absolute displacement = x + wb b. due to lower magnitude in comparison to other forces/moments g. Secondary bending shear is ignored. The primary shear (Vx) = R1e a. with the crane wheel at the location of maximum generated moment. generated by the crane at the applied loading is shown a.Stress calculations are compliant to required structural safety factors per CMAA Section 70. The table entries/resultants are as follows: a. due to motion of the bridge assembly c.wb/L). The maximum secondary bending moment (My) = 2*r1c * x* (L–x /L) f. generated by the crane at the applied loading is shown a. The rotational torsion (Tr) = r1c * nx2 * a Page | 81 . The location of the wheel loads are shown. The maximum vertical reactions.586* L. If the wheelbase is less than 0. R1c = MWL * (2 . absolute displacement. then Mx = MWL * L/4 e. r1c = (n-1) * 1/20 * (TR + LL). with the crane wheel at the location of maximum generated moment. for cases where the wheelbase is greater than 0.586 * cell length (L). located at x = ½ * (L – wb/2) b. The maximum primary bending moment (Mx) = (MWL / 2*L) * (L – wb/2)2. b = 2nd wheel location.

The secondary bending stress (σs) = My * ny1 / Iy = My / Sy1 k. a distributed-loading calculation is used: a. For the dead load (runway beam members). L = length of cell (in feet) b. Δx = (5/384 * Wt * (L^4)) / (E* Ix) i. The primary bending stress in tension (σp) = Mx * nx1 / Ix = Mx / Sx1 i. Where modulus of elasticity of steel (E) = 30.000 lb/in2 The runway deflection calculation comes from the ASD 9th edition. For the applied lifted loads. The angle of twist under torsion (°) = (180/π) * (12 * Tr * L) / (2 * G *(Ixx + Iyy)) a.000. For the vertical loading (in direction of gravity and primary bending): a. the maximum wheel loads (MWL) as symmetrical-spaced point loads are used: Page | 82 . The bending shear stress (τp) = Vx / A web = Vx / (tw * (D – 2 * tf)) a. The primary bending stress in compression (σp) = Mx * nx2 / Ix = Mx / Sx2 j. formulae for simple beam bending: symmetrical loading for a distributed load (runway dead load). Where shear modulus of elasticity of steel (G) = 11. The torsional shear stress (τr) = Tr * nx2 / (Ixx + Iyy) m. Secondary bending shear stress is ignored.000 lb/in2 b.500. plus symmetrical loading for a two-point loading on a single member.h. due to lower magnitude in comparison to other stresses l.

for uncambered sections. Δx = (1/24 * 0. Δxall = L / 600. and all secondary) = 0. The following stress values are considered the maximum allowable (or permissible) per CMAA Section 70 for structural members: a.a. Permissible Deflection is calculated.6 * σys Page | 83 . based on a direct correlation to runway span: a. Δxall = L / 400 The stress design check consists of a checking the case of combined stresses . These sections do not have curvature to negate dead-loads of the supported structure For the horizontal loading (perpendicular to gravity. must be less than unity to be considered acceptable.where the summation of the ratios of maximum stress-to-allowable stress. Tensile Bending stresses (primarily due to loading. Δx = (1/24 * MWL * a *(3* L ^2 + 4*a ^2)) / (E* Ix) c. the maximum wheel loads (MWL) as symmetrical-spaced point loads are used: a.2 * MWL * a *(3* L ^2 + 4*a ^2)) / (E* Ix) b. Permissible Deflection is calculated. for all possible stresses of design failure for a particular loading. For the applied lifted loads. and in the direction of secondary bending): a. based on a direct correlation to runway span: a.

Page | 84 . generally a concern for single web members only – as shown in the runway section of the calculation procedure) c.35 * σys a. Shear stresses (due to bending.35 * σys <= 1.35 * σys For the design check: sp/ 0. and all secondary) = 0.6 * σys + ss/ 0. couples. or rotational moments) = 0.b.6 * σys + τp / 0. for the girder cross-section to be considered acceptable for calculated loading case.35 * σys + τr / 0. (mainly in top-flange. Compressive Bending stresses (primarily due to loading.

absolute displacement = x – Wheelbase 1 b.For the bogie (8-wheel) dual loading crane configuration. the resultant loading data is given in Table 19: Fig.24: Table 19.x) Page | 85 . absolute displacement = x – “b” = x – (wb / 2) * (x . The table entries/resultants are as follows: a. b = location of 1st inside wheel. a = location of 1st outside wheel. Dual loading (8 wheel) resultant runway loads/stresses/design check/deflection Stress calculations are compliant to required structural safety factors per CMAA Section 70. 9. The location of the wheel loads are shown. as referenced from the left-hand most support (per classic beam-bending theory) a.2)/(1 .

The maximum primary bending moment (Mx) = (MWL / 2*L) * (L – wb/2)2. with the inner crane wheel at distance (b) from the location of maximum generated moment. d = location of 2nd outside wheel. Secondary bending shear is ignored. The maximum secondary bending moment (My) = 2*r1c * x* (L–x /L) f. c = location of 2nd inside wheel. generated by the crane at the applied loading is shown a. The primary bending stress (σp) = Mx * nx1 / Ix = Mx / Sx1 Page | 86 . r1c = (n-1) * 1/20 * (TR + LL) * (OWL/IWL). with the inner crane wheel at distance (b) from the location of maximum generated moment. due to motion of the bridge assembly d. The maximum horizontal reactions.wb/L) * (OWL/IWL). If the wheelbase is less than 0. absolute displacement = x + Dist + Wheelbase 2 b.586 * cell length (L). absolute displacement = x + distance between inside wheels (Dist) d. The maximum vertical reactions. The rotational torsion (Tr) = r1c * nx2 * a h. R1c = MWL * (2 . due to lower magnitude in comparison to other forces/moments g.c.586* L. for cases where the wheelbase is greater than 0. generated by the crane at the applied loading is shown a. then Mx = MWL * L/4 e. due to motion of the bridge assembly c. The primary shear (Vx) = R1e a.

The angle of twist under torsion (°) = (180/π) * (12 * Tr * L) / (2 * G *(Ixx + Iyy)) a. For the vertical loading (in direction of gravity and primary bending): a. For the applied lifted loads. L = length of cell (in feet) b. The secondary bending stress (σs) = My * ny1 / Iy = My / Sy1 j. formulae for simple beam bending: symmetrical loading for a distributed load (runway dead load).i. plus symmetrical loading for a two-point loading on a single member.000 lb/in2 The runway deflection calculation comes from the ASD 9th edition. The torsional shear stress (τr) = Tr * nx2 / (Ixx + Iyy) l.000 lb/in2 b. Where modulus of elasticity of steel (E) = 30. The bending shear stress (τp) = Vx / A web = Vx / (tw * (D – 2 * tf)) a. Secondary bending shear stress is ignored.000. For the dead load (runway beam members).500. a distributed-loading calculation is used: a. Where shear modulus of elasticity of steel (G) = 11. the outside and inside wheel loads (OWL & IWL) as symmetrical-spaced point loads are used: a. Δx = (5/384 * Wt * (L^4)) / (E* Ix) i. Δx = ((1/24 * OWL * a *(3* L ^2 + 4*a ^2)) / (E* Ix)) + ((1/24 * IWL * b *(3* L ^2 + 4*b ^2)) / (E* Ix)) Page | 87 . due to lower magnitude in comparison to other stresses k.

Tensile Bending stresses (primarily due to loading. Permissible Deflection is calculated.2 * OWL * a *(3* L ^2 + 4*a ^2)) / (E* Ix)) + ((1/24 * 0.2 * IWL * b *(3* L ^2 + 4*b ^2)) / (E* Ix)) b.c. For the applied lifted loads. and all secondary) = 0. for all possible stresses of design failure for a particular loading.where the summation of the ratios of maximum stress-to-allowable stress. for uncambered sections. These sections do not have curvature to negate dead-loads of the supported structure For the horizontal loading (perpendicular to gravity. Δxall = L / 600. Permissible Deflection is calculated. must be less than unity to be considered acceptable.6 * σys Page | 88 . based on a direct correlation to runway span: a. and in the direction of secondary bending): a. based on a direct correlation to runway span: a. The following stress values are considered the maximum allowable (or permissible) per CMAA Section 70 for structural members: a. the maximum wheel loads (MWL) as symmetrical-spaced point loads are used: a. Δxall = L / 400 The stress design check consists of a checking the case of combined stresses . Δx = ((1/24 * 0.

k = mean effective load factor. generally a concern for single web members only – as shown in the runway section of the calculation procedure) c. Mean stress (smean) = k * smax i. Fatigue endurance stress (sfat) = Se *suts i. 0.b.35 * σys + τr / 0. or rotational moments) = 0.5* suts for 1M cycles for most steels Page | 89 . Given as approx. couples. Material ultimate tensile strength (suts) = endurance limit of material prior to extreme deformation and fracture ii. a variable based on SN decomposition. For the fatigue check.35 * σys For the design check: sp/ 0. per CMAA Section 70. the Soderberg fatigue criterion is used: a.6 * σys + τp / 0. and all secondary) = 0. for the girder cross-section to be considered acceptable for calculated loading case.5 b. (mainly in top-flange. samp / sfat + smean / sys <= 1.35 * σys a. Amplitude stress (samp) = (1 – k) * smax c.35 * σys <= 1. Compressive Bending stresses (primarily due to loading.6 * σys + ss/ 0. Ratio of stress for infinite cycle life (Se). Shear stresses (due to bending. where: a.

25: Table 20. 9.26: Tables 21. 9.000+ cycles) As shown Tables 20 (for the girder fatigue check): Fig. per Soderberg fatigue criterion As shown in Table 21 (for the runway fatigue check. per Soderberg fatigue criterion Page | 90 . All summary checks with values less than or equal to unity are considered acceptable for infinite life (1M or 1. Yield strength of material (sys) = stress where plastic deformation onsets b.d.000. singe end truck loading): Fig. Fatigue check for girder loading/cross-section. Fatigue check for runway single end truck loading.

Class E.As shown in Table 22 (for the runway fatigue check.85. Class C smean = 0. shafting and hoist reeving.75 * smax c.27: Tables 22. Class F smean = 0. k = 0.80.95. k = 0. there is a recommended mean effective load adjustment factor to utilize in these calculations: a.75 * smax f. Class A smean = 0. Class D smean = 0. Class C. Fatigue check for runway single end truck loading. k = 0. double end truck loading): Fig. Class B. Class B smean = 0. to determine what is the approximate statistical average payload actually handled by the crane.90. 9. k = 0.75 * smax e. Class D.75 * smax b. k = 0.75 * smax Page | 91 . For each CMAA duty class of crane. such as wheel/bearings. Class E smean = 0.75. This is used to allow for more liberal adjustment in sizing critical load-bearing components. Class A.75. k = 0.75 * smax d. per Soderberg fatigue criterion The mean effective load factor is the adjustment factor for the maximum crane rating. Class F.

Class N4.38 *suts . k = 0. the assumed amplitude stress is taken to be the variance between maximum and mean – in both increment and decrement.90. Class C. a.0.75. Class A samp = (1 . based on permissible operating range: a. Class E. These CMAA cycle classes are broken down into four divisions. Class N2.0. Class N3.75. Class N1. 100k to 500k cycles c. k = 0. k = 0.0. the following fatigue endurance factors (Se) were calculated in regression: a.38 Page | 92 sfat = 0. based on a decomposition of a typical S-N chart for most mild steels.80. k = 0.0.80) * smax d. Class N1. 2M+ cycles For each cycle class. Class B. Class D. Since the lifted load is not to exceed the maximum rated load of the bridge. Class A samp = (1 . Se = 0.75) * smax b. Class A samp = (1 . 20k to 100k cycles b.95. k = 0. 500k to 2M cycles d. k = 0.90) * smax f.75) * smax c. Class A samp = (1 .85. Class A samp = (1 . Class A. Class F.95) * smax Each cycle class is considered to have an “expected” range of cyclical performance in handling payloads at the mean load rating.The mean effective load factor is also used to calculate the amplitude stress for each case.0.0.85) * smax e. Class A samp = (1 .

Se = 0.42 *suts c.47 *suts d. As long as the resultant values.42 sfat = 0. Class N3.666 * sys for most mild steels All maximum stresses for primary bending and secondary bending are multiplied by the load adjustment factors for a particular duty class. Class N2. Se = 0. Se = 0. and the material properties are multiplied by the fatigue adjustment factor for a particular cycle class.50 sfat = 0. as entered into the Soderberg relation is less than unity. the design is considered acceptable for fatigue – within that allotted duty and cycle class (or less).b.47 sfat = 0. Page | 93 . Where suts is approximately equal to 1.50 *suts a. Class N4.

and is to be carefully guarded against. the ones that will minimize material requirements and have desirable factors-of-safety. As plastic deformation is non-recoverable. it can lead to a weakened structure which is incapable of handling rated loads. They consist of the following: 1. and the induced stresses within the material. and eventually to structural failure (and possible collapse). which borrows heavily from the Euler beam theory is used in most applications. Hand-Calculations Page | 94 . structural and mechanical analysis of the supporting framework must be done. Strengths & Weaknesses of the comparative analysis methods The history of analysis for crane design and development is based on elastic material response & deformation theory. Plastic deformation is not permissible for structural design. This design scenario is to be guarded against at all costs. There are several options that are commonly utilized by most companies. low cost and is readily available for industrial manufacture. To develop the most effective designs. which is of high-strength. The plastic response is where a non-linear relationship (typically exponential) is maintained between the material strain. and the induced stresses within the material. each with their own inherent strengths. This theory. This elastic response is where an approximate linear relationship is maintained between the material strain. since the preferred material of choice is low-content carbon steel. The intent of the design is to maintain an elastic stress/strain response of the structure for all permissible loads and moments.10.

outside of industry standard b. rather than equation approximations c. Is a slow process to iterate.a. Can improve calculation time and accuracy with integrated equations/relationships of standard designs 3. Can be tailored for a specific company’s needs. Can be done quickly. writing tools) b. Can integrate a large number of design standards more effectively c. Hand-Calculations a. Can get accurate data based on virtual deformations of the object mesh. Ability to simulate results in a virtual environment b. Custom-software applications a. with integrated real-time calculations b. Done using equation balance or dimensional verification 2. paper. Can offer a greater degree of controlled access to analytical capability 4. can take many iterations to achieve a desired optimization of the design Page | 95 . Finite Element Analysis modules for CAD/CAM packages a. Can simulate and view virtual deformation under loading with results Some of the inherent weaknesses of each method are as follows: 1. Can be performed easily with minimal resources (text. Spreadsheet Applications a.

Is generally written to perform one type of analytical calculation alone i. Specialized knowledge is needed for effective development b. Can be altered without record of change (if not protected) and corrupted c. Requires a generalized starting point. Custom-software applications a. Restricted to (in most cases) – engineers and scientists ii. testing and de-bugging i. a general requirement of structural and/or mechanical scientific and engineering principles are necessary i. Required specialized knowledge to perform accurately. Requires setup. Spreadsheet Applications a. But can be integrated to perform a multitude. so most applications checked by hand will not vary far from industry standards c. Personnel with many years of specialized industrial experience 2. Specialized knowledge in engineering and software development is required b. Additional features can subtract from available development and re-work time Page | 96 .b. if performed properly 3. Require setup and testing to properly develop and ensure accuracy i.

c. easy to share and distribute is common-place in many areas of industry. etc). can reference a standard(s) of working knowledge (theory. Many features can also be emulated through the use of custom spreadsheets and databases utilities 4. thereby reducing costs The drive to develop analytical tools that are low in resource allocation. The primary advisement for this particular area of application is a simple interface and programming platform. More accessible during the finalization of a project. not the beginning c. modular for optimization. Requires a great deal of computational power i. Systems will need to be tailor-made to properly handle the necessary calculations b. Custom development of analysis tools proves best for most organizations. Extracting the most useful data can prove time-consuming i. The Page | 97 . Often requires a fully (or nearly) realized design prior to testing i. industrial standards. Will offer comparable results quicker in most cases than actual prototype development. one which can allow for ease of development and execution of calculations using equations-of-behavioral state to perform calculations and iterations. Finite Element Analysis modules for CAD/CAM packages a. They allow for the capture of data that is of commonality within their organization. Requires knowledge of determining boundary conditions to properly constrain model for simulation d.

For a majority of the nominal analytical calculations performed by engineers and designers in crane manufacture. Page | 98 . It’s where the need to merge resultant data from a number of different sources and arrays. is where the typical consideration is to develop customsoftware applications. But the versatility of modern spreadsheet tools offers a number of options for custom development. to improve the companywide knowledge base and generate user support and critical feedback. a standard spreadsheet proves effective for most singular applications. and is the preferred choice for the initial phase of this consolidation of structural and mechanical analysis methodology for overhead industrial crane development.interface can be shared amongst a number of members.

specifications. Design development – progression of the design from conceptual (covering basic operating parameters and overall dimensions). such as: methodology. such as: clearance windows. to general (standard designs which covers the general requirements). 1. And this also includes restrictions on design. to specialized (a projectspecific design that covers the operational parameters and will accommodate the project-specific nature of the system) 4. a number of steps have to be considered in order to realize a fully-fledged and viable design. Design validation & methodology – the main methods of design validation that are referenced in crane design Page | 99 . speeds and operating capacities. Design tolerances & allowable deviations – specified requirements of dimensional and operational parameters that have to be met to guarantee reliability and repeatable function of the crane. load limits. Specification of design parameters – operational parameters that the crane is to achieve. 5. Tolerances to ensure that components fit simply and smoothly into assemblies. etc. specifications to ensure safety and durability. Basic design intent – the general standards of design to be applied. such as: lift height. power requirements. ambient environment conditions 3.11. Path of design development in overhead crane systems In design development. and validation criterion 2.

a. routings. Finite Element Analysis – computational analysis of action/reaction development. The work procedure is developed and partitioned as according to the capabilities and capacities of the different groups/disciplines involved d. Empirical analysis – the specific testing of basic operational aspects of the crane system. Specification – the research into resources and allowable practices that will focus the scope of design. to ensure it meets the design requirements applied to it. bills of material). the validation Page | 100 . Resources that are typically allotted to design development a. where the conceptual aspect is transferred to form (papers. drawings. using fundamental principles of physical interaction and tensor-based mathematical modeling of design geometry c. using a physical model (or facsimile) where exact response nature can be determined through experimentation (scientific method. where the general limitations are of imagination and concise communication b. trial & error) 6. into a direction which will guarantee a useful product that has capability and cost-effectiveness c. Intent – the brainstorming aspect of design development. Development – the fabrication portion of design. Validation – the error and quality checkpoint of a design. based on fundamental principles of physics & physical interaction b. Equations of state – governing equations of physical properties and operation. In addition.

to allow for continuous improvement and refinement of the design Page | 101 . Iteration – repetition of the previous steps of the process. meets safety standards.process is where the sustainability of a design is benchmarked. as to whether it is resource-efficient. and is profitable in its implementation e.

Availability of design information a. the better. 3. Demands to quickly bring about a realized product/project often limit the amount of time available for conceptual development. 2. greater amounts of design analysis will generally be required. In many cases. Time-constraints of design a. which can allow for a variety of iterations is generally preferred. simple analyses are all that are required. 4. And the greater the number of parameters. b. the more information available at the initiation of design. so information is often limited. it becomes paramount to choose the right method for the right purpose. and only requires minor modulations to tailor them to the needs of the current design.12. the more iteration required. Reasons to consider in choicemethodology are as follows: 1. Reasoning to bring cohesion to analysis methodology With so many choices for analytical methods to choose from. Optimization challenges Page | 102 . as that design information for a project encompasses existing design standards. So quick analyses. For designs that have to be developed from scratch. As always. But often design parameters are still preliminary in nature during initial conceptual development. Analytical resources available or on-demand a.

the more time and resources required to verify its feasibility. and require verification analysis to ensure functionality and compatibility. and adjust as them as much as possible to tailorfit them to the needs of the custom variation. Designs often are in need of revision or significant changes to remain profitable as time passes. without having to re-create work or alter designs drastically.a. Fluctuations in costs of raw materials. this can so be done with the equations of state as well. So what is generally best is to begin with a series of templates for each standard design variation. such as geometry and loading. Page | 103 . Equations-of-state analysis uses the basis of static and dynamic equilibrium to develop the system reactions to applied forces and moments. The greater the variance allowed in a design. This would allow for more expedient updates to the analytical process. generalized equations of state can be developed for each design template. And in addition to basic parameters. manufacture. Often this means extracting components of the original design. along with the structural behavior (assuming known material properties and approximate linear behavior). Whereas alteration of the geometric parameters is done to match them accordingly to the custom variation. actuation. From maintaining static equilibrium. and testing require that the design be developed to utilize these resources in the most optimal means possible. machining. or significant alterations which change the design. one can determine the supporting reactions to the applied forces.

Equations-of-state analysis is the simplest methodology to computationally calculate and iterate. Page | 104 . It can become quite complex as the number of interactions increases. A strong foundational knowledge-base of free-body interaction is required to interpret results effectively and accurately.Dynamic equilibrium. which can be used to determine if design changes will prove effective in implementation. And these must be applied accurately to achieve feasible results. and can lead to greater user versatility. have a justifiable return of investment. Under-constrained systems are not capable of yielding proper solution. known constraints of motion applied to the body eliminates degrees-of-freedom in motion. it requires knowing governing parameters of the systems to provide constraints of motion and action. Each body is subjected to a number of degrees of translational and rotational freedom. using permissible loading factors and load-case modeling. And also motion simulation and analysis. It is then principally driven by the Newtonian laws of motion. leads to an understanding of motion of the structural system in response to applied forces and moments. which dictate an equality balance of translational and rotational forces – that all forces which drive motion have equal and opposing counter-parts. which means that the reactions to applied forces and moments are not accurately related and unreliable. An extension of free-body analysis. and that the summation of these forces must equate to the final determined motion of the system.

applications that are linear in independent/dependant response can generally be utilized for most analytical requirements – and maintain a very high degree of analysis-to-actual correlation. without having to re-compile the solver database each time. able to work with basics of crane design parameters (critical dimensions and loading). integrated with a comprehensive structural database and iterative optimization sub-routines. Page | 105 . The optimization and analysis custom solver will be developed as a free-standing sub-routine. Continued improvement upon the progress made with this Microsoft Excel®–based linear solver. to be created in Microsoft Visual Studio 2008®. Due to the fact that most structural designs are within the elastic region of material response. embedded optimization. It will continue to be developed in a Visual BASIC® format to allow for macro development and integration with a number of design programs already available for the Windows® operating system platform. Results and Conclusions The development of equation of state solvers for structural engineering analysis for overhead industrial cranes (sizing of steel cross-sections and resistance to different types of loading and/or failure) is a cost-effective method to be considered for most companies. The datasheet results will be distributed amongst the input operational parameters. and analytical/optimization results of each iteration. by incorporating the aspects into an updated solver. to provide designers with a method of performing global analysis quickly and at minimum cost of set-up time and computing effort. This simplicity will allow designers to run multiple iterations.13. The final goal is the development of a quick and simple self-standing structural analytical solver. design criterion.

Page | 106 .This will allow for crane manufacturers to produce the best product available for the lowest investment required.

110 C.14.107 B.129 .119 D.sample calculation Page | 107 pp.sample calculation pp. Moments. Advanced Runway Reactions. Moments. Preliminary Runway Reactions. Appendix A. Stresses. Stresses. Stresses. Moments. and Design Checks: For an Eight-wheel bridge crane .sample calculation pp. Advanced Runway Reactions. and Design Checks: For a Four-wheel bridge crane . Preliminary Runway Reactions. and Design Checks: For a Four-wheel bridge crane . Stresses. Moments. and Design Checks: For a Four-wheel bridge crane .sample calculation pp.

or b = L . P2.(a + wb) a = distance from left-hand support to P1. P2. W = L x "ld" > Page | 108 . R2. W Weight of Beam "W" is a factor of beam length and linear density. L. M2_LL > > > left-hand side reaction equation > right-hand side reaction equation With b = L -(a + wheelbase "wb").A. M1_LL. R2. Preliminary Runway Reactions. wb Dependent Variables: R1. Stresses. a. a. wb Dependent Variables: R1. L. b= distance from right-hand support to P2 > > > > Moment about left-hand support (R1) > Moment about right-hand support (R2) Maximum moment resides in region (a<= x < b) Case 2: Beam Load Independent Variables: P1. Mmax_DL. Moments. and Design Checks: For a 4-wheel bridge crane – sample calculation *All calculations developed and executed in Maple 12 mathematical software package* Case 1: Live Load Independent Variables: P1.

25 x (LL + Tr) > > > Page | 109 . a. in region (a<= x < b) > Case 4: Runway Horizontal Forces Independent Variables: LL. r2_L. wb Dependent Variables: r1_L. m2_L > > Lateral reaction at left-hand side > Lateral reaction at right-hand side With P1_L and P2_L both equal to one-quarter of the lifted load and trolley weight. Tr. L. m1_L. or P1_L = P2_L = 0.> Self-weight reaction at left-hand side > Self-weight reaction at right-hand side > Maximum bending moment due to self-weight Maximum reactions/moment is due to superposition of the beam load and the applied loads.

>

>

lateral moment about left-hand support (r1_L)

>

lateral moment about right-hand support (r2_L)

Maximum moment resides in region (a<= x < b)
Case 5: Longitudinal Forces (Horizontal)
Independent Variables: P1, P2, L, a, wb
Dependent Variables: RHorz, r1, r2
>
Case 6: Torsion
Independent Variables: LL, Tr, L, a, wb, h
Dependent Variables: T1, T2, Ta, Tb, Tc, Tmax
>
torsional reaction at left-hand support due to lateral loading

>

torsional reaction at right-hand support due to lateral loading

With the following definitions:
a1 = a
b1 = wb
c1 = L - (a + wb)
>

for 2 point runway loading (for a 4-wheel bridge)

Maximum torsion exists in regions a1 (0<= x < a) & c1 (b<= x < L)

Page | 110

B. Preliminary Runway Reactions, Moments, Stresses, and Design Checks:
For an 8-wheel bridge crane – sample calculation

*All calculations developed and executed in Maple 12 mathematical
software package*
Case 1: Live Load
Independent Variables: P1, P2, P3, P4, L, a, b, c, d, e, wb
Dependent Variables: R1, R2, M1_LL, M2_LL
>
>
left-hand side reaction

>
equation

right-hand side reaction

>
equation

With b & d = (wheelbase) "wb",
a = distance from left-hand support to P1; e= distance from right-hand support to P2;
c = distance between inside wheels on end truck
>

>

>

>

Page | 111

Moment about left-hand support (R1) (0 <= x < a)

Moment about left-hand support (R1) (a<= x <b)

Moment about right-hand support (R2) (d<= x < L)

>

Moment about right-hand support (R2) (c<= x < d)

>

Maximum moment resides in region (b<= x < c)
Case 2: Beam Load
Independent Variables: P1, P2, P3, P4, L, a, b, c, d, e, wb
Dependent Variables: R1, R2, Mmax_DL, W
Weight of Beam "W" is a factor of beam length and linear density. W = L x "ld"
>

>

Self-weight reaction at left-hand side

>

Self-weight reaction at right-hand side

>

Maximum bending moment due to self-weight

Maximum reactions/moment is due to superposition of the beam load and the
applied loads, in region (b<= x < c)
>

Page | 112

r2_L. m2_L > > Lateral reaction at left- hand side > Lateral reaction at right- hand side Distibution of loading for 8 point system is based on moment balance. where outside load (P1_L & P4_L) are: > Distibution of loading for 8 point system is based on moment balance. Tr.Case 4: Runway Horizontal Forces Independent Variables: LL. where inside load (P2_L & P3_L) are: > Page | 113 . m1_L. wb Dependent Variables: r1_L. L. a.

> > > > Page | 114 lateral moment about left-hand support (r1_L) (0 <= x < a) lateral moment about right-hand support (r2_L) (a<= x <b) .

> maximum lateral moment about right-hand support (r2_L) (d<= x <L) > maximum lateral moment about right-hand support (r2_L) (c<= x < d) Page | 115 .

L. Tb. wb. a. wb Dependent Variables: RHorz. P2. a. Tmax > Page | 116 torsional reaction at left-hand support due to lateral loading . Ta. Tr. h Dependent Variables: T1. T2. L. r2 > Case 6: Torsion Independent Variables: LL. Tc.Maximum moment resides in region (b<= x < c) Case 5: Longitudinal Forces (Horizontal) Independent Variables: P1. r1.

(a + e + 2*wb) d1 = wb e1 = e > wheel bridge) Page | 117 for 4 point runway loading (for a 8- .> torsional reaction at right-hand support due to lateral loading With the following definitions: a1 = a b1 = wb c1 = L .

Page | 118 .

Maximum torsion exists in regions b1 (a<= x < b) & d1 (c<= x < d) Page | 119 .

and Design Checks: For a 4-wheel bridge crane – sample calculation *All calculations developed and executed in Maple 12 mathematical software package* > Database for standard structural beam sections. Base Flange: Page | 120 (Length of Runway Cell. expressed in feet) . Stresses. Beam Name: 1. Cell Length: 2. Advanced Runway Reactions. imported into Maple 12 solver > Database for standard square-bar rail sections.C. imported into Maple 12 solver *Global Variables* Beam Parameters: 0. Moments. Beam Depth: 3.

Linear Density: weight per unit foot of rail length 17. Trolley Weight 20. Rail Name: 13. Rail Depth: 15. Iyy: 9. expressed in feet) 14.in pounds) One-quarter of the live load (maximum capacity - . Rail Width: 16. Iyy: Crane Parameters: 19. Area Rail Parameters: 12. Zyy: 11. Crane Live Load in pounds) Page | 121 Weight of crane (hoist and trolley . Rail Length: (Length of Rail. Ixx: 8. Zxx: 10. Ixx: 18. Thickness Web: 6. Linear Density: weight per unit foot of beam length 7. Thickness Flange: 5.4.

Yield Strength of Material Wheel-base of crane trolley (in inches) (psi) 23.(a + wb). Crane Wheelbase 22.(a + wheelbase) or b = L .One-quarter of the live load (maximum capacity .in pounds) 21. Distance from support (R1) to center of first wheel (in inches) Case of Single Crane Loading Live Load Parameter: From given layout. b = L . Substituting for b into reference equations gives: Solving for the regional values of resultant bending shear force (V) yields the following: (units below are in lbf) Page | 122 .

Between (0<= x < a) Between (a<= x < b) Between (b<= x <c) Between (c<= x < L) Solving for the regional values of resultant primary bending moment (M) yields the following: (units below are in lbf-in) Between (0<= x < a) Between (a<= x < b) Between (b<= x <c) Between (c<= x < L) Page | 123 .

Solving for the regional values of resultant secondary bending moment (m) yields the following: (units below are in lbf-in) Between (0<= x < a) Between (a<= x < c) Between (c<= x <L) Solving for the required values for regional minimum beam cross-section (A_min) yields the following: (τ = V*A^-1) (units below are in in^2) Between (0<= x < a) Between (a<= x < b) Between (b<= x <c) Between (c<= x < L) Page | 124 .

Solving for the required values for regional minimum beam second moment of primary cross-section (Ixx_min) yields the following: (σ = M*c*Ixx^-1) (units below are in in^4) Between (0<= x < a) Between (a<= x < b) Between (b<= x <c) Between (c<= x < L) Solving for the required values for regional minimum beam second moment of torsional cross-section (Izz_min) yields the following: (τ = T*r*Izz^-1) (units below are in in^4) Between (0<= x < a) Between (a<= x < c) Between (c<= x < L) Page | 125 .

Solving for the resultant values for regional primary bending stress (σ) yields the following: (σ = M*c*Ixx^-1) (units below are in psi) Between (0<= x < a) Between (a<= x < b) Between (b<= x <c) Between (c<= x < L) Solving for the resultant values for regional primary bending stress (τ) yields the following: (τ = V*A^-1) (units below are in psi) Between (0<= x < a) Between (a<= x < b) Between (b<= x <c) Between (c<= x < L) Page | 126 .

Solving for the required values for regional torsional stress (τ) yields the following: (τ
= T*r*Izz^-1) (units below are in psi)
Between (0<= x < a)

Between (a<= x < c)

Between (c<= x < L)

Design Stress Check for Combined Stressed: (if less than unity for each, then design
choices are acceptable)
Verification in region (0<= x <a)

Verification in region (a<= x <b)

Verification in region (b<= x <c)

Verification in region (c<= x <L)

Page | 127

Design Check for Sideways Web Buckling: (ratio = (h/tw)/(L/bf), where h = Db2*tf

Use the following equation for the design check for sections for web sections with the
ratio < 2.3, and that are restrained against rotation. The maximum permissible
wheel-load to prevent web buckling is:

If the resultant is "true", use the design check below. If it is "false", buckling will not
occur.

If the moment at the load divided by yield moment (My = Ys*Zxx) is less than one,
use Cr = 960,000 psi; if the moment ratio is greater than or equal to one, use
Cr=480,000 psi

This is the maximum permissible wheel-load for sections restrained against rotation

Page | 128

Use the following equation for the design check for sections for web sections with the
ratio < 1.7, and that are not restrained against rotation. The maximum permissible
wheel-load to prevent web buckling is:

If the resultant is "true", use the design check below. If it is "false", buckling will not
occur.

If the moment at the load divided by yield moment (My = Ys*Zxx) is less than one,
use Cr = 960,000 psi; if the moment ratio is greater than or equal to one, use
Cr=480,000 psi

This is the maximum permissible wheel-load for sections not restrained against
rotation

Page | 129

Beam Name: 1. Stresses. imported into Maple 12 solver *Global Variables* Beam Parameters: 0.D. Moments. imported into Maple 12 solver > > Database for standard square-bar rail sections. Advanced Runway Reactions. Base Flange: Page | 130 (Length of Runway Cell. Beam Depth: 3. and Design Checks: For an 8-wheel bridge crane – sample calculation *All calculations developed and executed in Maple 12 mathematical software package* Database for standard structural beam sections. Cell Length: 2. expressed in feet) .

Zxx: 10. Zyy: 11. expressed in feet) 14. Rail Width: 16.4. Area Rail Parameters: 12. Rail Name: 13.in pounds) The equivalent center live-load (from 2 pt moment 21. Thickness Flange: 5. Ixx: 18. Trolley Weight Weight of crane (hoist and trolley . Linear Density: weight per unit foot of beam length 7. Linear Density: weight per unit foot of rail length 17. Rail Depth: 15. Thickness Web: 6. Rail Length: (Length of Rail. Crane Wheelbase Wheel-base of crane trolley (in inches) Page | 131 . Crane Live Load balance . Iyy: Crane Parameters: 19. Iyy: 9.in pounds) 20. Ixx: 8.

(a+2*wb+dist). b = d = wheelbase or b = d = wb. Substituting for b. Distance between near wheels Case of Single Crane Loading Live Load Parameter: From given layout.(a+b+c+d) = 12*Lb . Yield Strength of Material (psi) 23.22. e = 12*Lb . c .d & e into reference equations gives: Page | 132 . Distance from support (R1) to center of first wheel (in inches) 24. c = distance between near wheels (dist).

Solving for the moment balance shows that the load on the outside wheels (P1 & P4) are as follows: Solving for the moment balance shows that the load on the inside wheels (P2 & P3) are as follows: Substituting the corrected wheel-loads into the reaction & moment equations yields the following: Page | 133 .

Solving for the regional values of resultant bending shear force (V) yields the following: (units below are in lbf) Between (0<= x < a) Between (a<= x < b) Between (b<= x <c) Between (c<= x < d) Between (d<= x < e) Between (e<= x < L) Solving for the regional values of resultant primary bending moment (M) yields the following: (units below are in lbf-in) Between (0<= x < a) Between (a<= x < b) Page | 134 .

Between (b<= x <c) Between (c<= x < d) Between (d<= x < e) Between (e<= x < L) Solving for the regional values of resultant secondary bending moment (m) yields the following: (units below are in lbf-in) Between (0<= x < a) Between (a<= x < b) Between (b<= x < d) Between (d<= x < e) Page | 135 .

Between (e<= x < L) Solving for the required values for regional minimum beam cross-section (A_min) yields the following: (τ = V*A^-1) (units below are in in^2) Between (0<= x < a) Between (a<= x < b) Between (b<= x <c) Between (c<= x < d) Between (d<= x < e) Page | 136 .

Between (e<= x < L) Solving for the required values for regional minimum beam second moment of primary cross-section (Ixx_min) yields the following: (σ = M*c*Ixx^-1) (units below are in in^4) Between (0<= x < a) Between (a<= x < b) Between (b<= x <c) Between (c<= x < d) Between (d<= x < e) Between (e<= x < L) Page | 137 .

Solving for the required values for regional minimum beam second moment of torsional cross-section (Izz_min) yields the following: (τ = T*r*Izz^-1) (units below are in in^4) Between (0<= x < a) Between (a<= x < b) Between (b<= x < d) Between (d<= x < e) Between (e<= x < L) Solving for the resultant values for regional primary bending stress (σ) yields the following: (σ = M*c*Ixx^-1) (units below are in psi) Between (0<= x < a) Between (a<= x < b) Page | 138 .

Between (b<= x <c) Between (c<= x < d) Between (d<= x < e) Between (e<= x < L) Solving for the resultant values for regional primary bending stress (τ) yields the following: (τ = V*A^-1) (units below are in psi) Between (0<= x < a) Between (a<= x < b) Between (b<= x <c) Between (c<= x < d) Page | 139 .

Between (d<= x < e) Between (e<= x < L) Solving for the required values for regional torsional stress (τ) yields the following: (τ = T*r*Izz^-1) (units below are in psi) Between (0<= x < a) Between (a<= x < b) Between (b<= x < d) Between (d<= x < e) Between (e<= x < L) Design Stress Check for Combined Stressed: (if less than unity for each. then design choices are acceptable) Verification in region (0<= x <a) Page | 140 .

The maximum permissible wheel-load to prevent web buckling is: Page | 141 .Verification in region (a<= x <b) Verification in region (b<= x <c) Verification in region (c<= x <d) Verification in region (d<= x <e) Verification in region (e<= x <L) Design Check for Sideways Web Buckling: (ratio = (h/tw)/(L/bf). and that are restrained against rotation. where h = Db2*tf Use the following equation for the design check for sections for web sections with the ratio < 2.3.

buckling will not occur.000 psi.000 psi Page | 142 . If the moment at the load divided by yield moment (My = Ys*Zxx) is less than one. use Cr=480. if the moment ratio is greater than or equal to one. and that are not restrained against rotation. The maximum permissible wheel-load to prevent web buckling is: If the resultant is "true". use Cr = 960. use Cr=480. use Cr = 960. If it is "false".000 psi. use the design check below. If it is "false". buckling will not occur. If the moment at the load divided by yield moment (My = Ys*Zxx) is less than one.000 psi This is the maximum permissible wheel-load for sections restrained against rotation Use the following equation for the design check for sections for web sections with the ratio < 1.If the resultant is "true". if the moment ratio is greater than or equal to one. use the design check below.7.

This is the maximum permissible wheel-load for sections not restrained against rotation Page | 143 .

James A Fisher. Principles and practice of engineering : architectural engineering sample questions and solutions Reston. New York. : American Society of Civil Engineers. J. 2007 7.C. New York. P. Allowable Stress Design. 2005 9. c2008 Page | 144 .E. Akin. Finite Element Analysis with Error Estimators: An Introduction to the FEM and Adaptive Error Analysis for Engineering Students. New Jersey. Fracture.15. Professional Publications. Michael R Lindenburg. American Institute of Steel Construction. McGraw Hill. Hibbeler. Fundamentals of Finite Element Analysis. Belmont. Va. Inc..E. Upper Saddle River. R. Bibliography 1. Industrial Press Inc. Mechanics of materials. Industrial Buildings: Roofs to Column Anchorage”. “Specifications for TopRunning Bridge & Gantry-Type Multiple Girder Electric Overhead Traveling Crane”. 9 th Edition. Elsevier ButterworthHeinemann. 1989 4. New York. N. 1993 6.Prentice Hall. : Prentice Hall. Revised 2004 2. 26th Edition. Crane Manufacturers Association of America (CMAA). “Steel Design Guide Series 7. and Fatigue.. American Institute of Steel Construction. 2004 5. Norman E Dowling. Mechanical Behavior of Materials: Engineering Methods for Deformation. David Hutton. Article #70. Pearson . Machinery’s Handbook. 2010 8. AISC Manual of Steel Construction. Third Edition. 2000 3. Core Engineering Concepts for Students and Professionals. c2010 10.J.

Structural and stress analysis.W. P. c2005 19. Structural engineering analysis by finite elements. 2003 20. Welleman. Prentice-Hall of India. CRC Press Taylor & Francis Group. NJ : Prentice-Hall. Berlin . C. Hartsuijker and J. Robert J Melosh. What Every Engineer should know about Computational Techniques of Finite Element Analysis: 2nd Edition. N.G. c2007 12. c2005 18. Textbook of Finite Element Analysis. Boston : Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann. : Springer. Boston : Elsevier Butterworth Heineman. Hoboken. Hart.C. NJ : John Wiley & Sons. 2006-c2007 16.Y.J. New York. and structural matrices. and safety in structural engineering. Megson. Engineering mechanics. strain. New Delhi. c1982 15. : Prentice-Hall. c2007 17. Mechanics of structural elements: theory and applications. New York : Springer. Slivker. Amsterdam . [London] : Springer. Introduction to structural engineering analysis and design.11. John M. Fundamentals of structural mechanics. loads. c1986 14. Hjelmstad. Pilkey. Vladimir I. Walter D. New York. Gary C. Keith D. O. Seshu. 2009 21. The finite element method for solid and structural mechanics. Englewood Cliffs. Formulas for stress. Uncertainty analysis. Dordrecht .J. Thomas H. Zienkiewic. 1990 22. Marks' standard handbook for mechanical engineers. c2005 Page | 145 . Englewood Cliffs. Amsterdam . New York : McGraw-Hill. N. Biggs. : Prentice Hall. Louis Komzsik. N. Englewood Cliffs. c2005 13.