You are on page 1of 27

# Homework #6

## By: Hazem Amer, Wanzhi Liu and Oswaldo Russian

Pledge: We, Hazem Amer, Wanzhi Liu and Oswaldo Russian, pledge not to have
given nor received any assistance in the realization of this homework.
Signatures (Date):
Hazem Amer:
Wanzhi Liu:
Oswaldo Russian:

November, 2016
Given Data:

## Crane Capacity = 80000 lb.

Hoist and Trolley Weight = 18500 lb.
Crane Bridge Weight = 143800 lb.
Wheel Base = 18.00 ft.
Crane Rail Weight = 35 lb. /ft.
Spacing = 25.00 ft.

## = 0.2(80000 + 18500) = 19700 .

19700
( ) = = 4925
4

( ) = ( + ) = . = .

## 2 Vertical Load on A Frame

25 18
= 75000 (1 + ) = 96000 .
25

## + = 25(35 + 84) = 2975 .

( ) = . + . = . = .

3 Analysis

## The structure will be analyzed for two cases:

In the following sections, the section and load assignments, deformed configurations, axial force
diagrams, bending moment diagrams and normal stresses diagrams are presented (in this order).
SAP2000 Model: Section Assignments
SAP2000 11/14/16 22:43:15

## SAP2000 v15.2.1 - File:HW6_1 - Frame Section Properties - Kip, in, F Units

SAP2000 11/15/16 15:12:04

SAP2000 v15.2.1 - File:HW6_1 - Joint Loads (Lateral_Left) (As Defined) - Kip, in, F Units
SAP2000 11/15/16 15:12:29

SAP2000 v15.2.1 - File:HW6_1 - Joint Loads (Lateral_Right) (As Defined) - Kip, in, F Units
SAP2000 Model: Deformed Shape
SAP2000 11/15/16 15:05:58

## SAP2000 v15.2.1 - File:HW6_1 - Deformed Shape (Lateral_Left) - Kip, in, F Units

SAP2000 Model: Deformed Shape
SAP2000 11/15/16 15:06:16

## SAP2000 v15.2.1 - File:HW6_1 - Deformed Shape (Lateral_Right) - Kip, in, F Units

SAP2000 Model: Axial Force Diagrams
SAP2000 11/15/16 15:13:07

SAP2000 v15.2.1 - File:HW6_1 - Axial Force Diagram (Lateral_Left) - Kip, in, F Units
SAP2000 Model: Axial Force Diagrams
SAP2000 11/15/16 15:13:35

SAP2000 v15.2.1 - File:HW6_1 - Axial Force Diagram (Lateral_Right) - Kip, in, F Units
SAP2000 Model: Bending Moment Diagrams
SAP2000 11/15/16 15:15:11

SAP2000 v15.2.1 - File:HW6_1 - Moment 3-3 Diagram (Lateral_Left) - Kip, in, F Units
SAP2000 Model: Bending Moment Diagrams
SAP2000 11/15/16 15:15:33

SAP2000 v15.2.1 - File:HW6_1 - Moment 3-3 Diagram (Lateral_Right) - Kip, in, F Units
SAP2000 Model: Max/Min Normal Stresses (S11)
SAP2000 11/15/16 15:16:48

SAP2000 v15.2.1 - File:HW6_1 - Stress S11 Max/Min Diagram (Lateral_Left) - Kip, in, F Units
SAP2000 Model: Max/Min Normal Stresses (S11)
SAP2000 11/15/16 15:16:15

SAP2000 v15.2.1 - File:HW6_1 - Stress S11 Max/Min Diagram (Lateral_Right) - Kip, in, F Units
4 Lateral Deflection at Top of A Frame

The maximum lateral deflection occurs at the top of the A Frame under the case of lateral load applied
to the right, and has a value of 1.6984 in. (to the right).
In the case of the lateral load applied to the left, the resulting maximum lateral deflection occurs at the top
of the A Frame and has a value of 0.7397 in. (to the right).

## 5 Evaluating Capacity of the Members

The demand (stresses) on each of the members is noted in section 3. Here, it is noted that some members
are stressed beyond their yield or ultimate stress limits. These are depicted as follows.
Lateral Load to the Right (most unfavorable case)

## Figure 1. Normal Stresses at top of A Frame (lateral load to the right)

As shown in Figure 1., for the case of the lateral load acting to the right (most unfavorable case), the
magnitude of the normal stress on Member 2-4 (the highest section of the sloping W12X14 member) is
104 ksi. This exceeds the ultimate stress of 65 ksi. The same is true for Member 3-1 (the top member in
the A Frame), which has a maximum magnitude of normal stress of 95 ksi.
As shown in section 3, there are other members close to or at the yield stress.
For completeness, we include the stresses for the case of the lateral load acting to the left, even as it is not
as unfavorable.

## Figure 2. Normal Stresses at top of A Frame (lateral load to the left)

6 Why did the Fracture Occur?

As shown in the previous analysis, both elements converging at the rigid joint were fracture occurred
have calculated stresses above the ultimate stress of the material. This is thought to be the reason for the
fracture (crack).

7 Lessons Learned

The stresses are above the physical capabilities (resistance) of the materials. Naturally, this design would
not be sufficient for with respect to any code (as these impose more stringent criteria). Although it is
understood that uniformity is sought after and optimization (economy is necessary), we would select
sections for which the demand (stresses) do not exceed the capacity. And we would select them such that
they met the requirements of the applicable codes.