Sie sind auf Seite 1von 22

P w . l .

f I
ENGINEERING DATA TRANSMITTAL
1 . ~ 0 ~ 625110
2. To: (Receiving Organization) 3. Fran: (Originating Organization) 4. Related ED7 NO.:
Distribution . .
Ooeration Eauioment N/A
I Engineering I
5. Proj./Prog./Oept./Div.: I 6 . Design Authority/ Design Agent/Cog.
Engr.:
I 7. Purchase Drdar NO. :

TWRS Interim Stabilization H. H. Ziada


Engineering
8. Originator Remarks: 9 . Eguip./Conponent NO.:
This EDT Transmits the Release o f the Supporting Document
HNF-3286, Rev. 0 10. SystdB(dg./FasiLity:

11. Receiver Remarks: 11A. Design Baseline Docunent? [X] Yes [] No


I 12. Major Asam. Dug. No.:

13. Permit/Permit Application No.:

15. DATA TRANSMITTED (F) (0) (HI (I)


IAl IC1 ID) Approval Reason O+# Recab-
Sheet Re". IEl M a or Dascdption 01 Data D.ip- tor nator .r
ltam
NO.
IS1 DocumsntiDrawingNo. No. NO.
Transmmsd nator Tnni- DIspo- Dispo-
mittai .nbn dum

1 HNF-3286 0 Design Analysis o f SQ 2


2.000 lb. Jib Crane

Appmval Oasignator IF1 I Reaeon far T r . n ~ m ~ a l ~ Q l I DIwadtbn (HI & (I1


E. S, (1. D or NIA [ 1 . Approval 4. Review I 1. Appmved 4. Reviewed noleomment
leea WHC-CM-3-6. 2 . Release 5 . Poat-Review 2. Appmvad wlmmmmt 6. Reviewedwlsomrnsnt
Sso.12.71 3. information 6. Diit. IRecdpt AEknow. Requiredl 3. Dhppravad w/Eommml 6, Rscolpt afknowledged

Sionotura of EOT ..
Originator I for Receiving Orgmlzatlon Cognizant Manager
I
S
HNF-3286, Rev. 0

Design Analysis of 2,000 Lb. Jib Crane for


Chemical Lab

H. H. Ziada
Numatec Hanford Corporation, Richland, WA 99352
U.S. Department o f Energy Contract DE-AC06-96RL13200

EDT/ECN: 625110 uc: 2000


Org Code: 82600 Charge Code: 103352/EF00
B&R Code: EW3120071 T o t a l Pages: 20

Key Words: J i b Crane, Chemical Lab, 200 East, Design Analysis, H o i s t i n g


and Rigging, Tank Farms.
A b s t r a c t : T h i s design a n a l y s i s provides a design ( M a t e r i a l s , s i z e s , and
dimensions) o f a 2,000 l b . J i b Crane t o be i n s t a l l e d i n t h e 200 East
Tank Farms Chemical Lab (MO-733) t o r e p l a c e an e x i s t i n g 1,0001b. J i b
Crane.

TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER. Reference h e r e i n t o any s p e c i f i c c m r c i a l prcduct, process, o r s e r v i c e by


t r a d e name, trademark, manufacturer, o r otherwise, does n o t n e c e s s a r i l y c o n s t i t u t e or imply i t s
endorserent, recamendation, o r favoring by the United States G o v e r m n t o r any agency thereof o r
i t s c o n t r a c t o r s o r subcontractors.

P r i n t e d i n t h e United States of America. lo o b t a i n copies of t h i s docunent, contact: D o c M m t


Control Services, P.O. Box 950, Mailstop H6-OB, Richland UA 99352, Phone (509) 372-2420;
Fax (509) 376-4989.

10:
I ,
a

Approved for Public Release


A-6400-073 (01197) GEF321
CHECKLIST FOR INDEPENDENT REVIEW

Document Reviewed Desiqn Analysis of 2.0001bf Jib Crane for Chemical Lab

Document No. HNF-3286 - Rev. 0


Author H. H. Ziada

Y e s m u
Da [ I [ I Problem completely defined.
MI 1 1 [ I Necessary assumptions explicitly stated and supported.
[ I [ I ba Computer codes and data files documented.
w [ I [ I Data used in calculations explicitly stated in
document.

fA [ I [ I Data checked for consistency with original source


information as applicable.
w [ I [ I Mathematical derivations checked including dimensional
consistency of results.
pa 11 [ I Models appropriate and used within range of validity
or use outside range of established validity
justified .
p4 [ I [ I Hand calculations checked for errors.
11 [ I DQ Code run streams correct and consistent with analysis
documentation.
1 1 [ I pa Code output consistent with input and with results
reported in analysis documentation.
ga 1 1 [ I Acceptability limits on analytical results applicable
and supported. Limits checked against sources.
w Safety margins consistent with good engineering
practices.
JKl [ I [ I Conclusions consistent with analytical results and
applicable 1 imi ts.
pl [ I [ I Results and conclusions address all points required in
the problem statement.

L . J. Julyk
Reviewer
HNF-3286, Rev. 0

Design Analysis of 2,000 lb.


Jib Crane for Chemical Lab

H. H. Ziada
January 1999
HNF-3286 Rev. 0

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 .O INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE 1

2.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1

3.0 CONFIGURATION AND MATERIAL 2

4.0 LOADING AND CRITERIA 2

4.1 LOADING 2

4.2 ALLOWABLE STRESSES AND LOADS 2

5.0 ANALYSIS 4

5.1 JIB CRANE BOOM 4

5.2 HINGE BRACKETS 5

5.3 HINGE PIN 7

5.4 WELDS 9

5.5 ANALYSIS RESULTS 11

6.0 REFERENCES 12
Numatec Hanford Corp. Doc No. N F a
EVALUATIONANALYSIS 4-
R.v*ion:
I d
a
uk
.- W O N o b N o . ~ O
-:- L.b

LoamlK ev:

DESIGN ANALYSIS OF 2,000 IMJIB CRANE FOR CHEMICAL LAB

I.O INTRODUCTIONAND OBJECTIVE

A 2.000 Ibf jib crane is needed to replace an edsting 1,000 Ibf jib crane in the Chemical Lab (Building -733).

The edsting I.OOO Ibf jib crane (to be replaced) has a 1 7 4 boom (I-beam). The crane is attached to the wall through
two brackets (about 8 ID-R apart). The boom is attached to the lower bracket, and a supporting rod is attached to
the upper bracket. The supporting rod is attached to the boom at about 8 4 fmm the free end.

After prellminatystudies and discussions, It was decided to construct the new jib crane fmm two perpedlcular
I-beams (L-shape) without a supporting rod (see Figure I). The crane is to be supported on the wall through the two
lower edsting brackets (about 5-R apart). The boom is to be 20-R long cantilever (the horizontal Cbeam). The vertical
I-beam is to be attached to the lower two exisling brackets to support the jib crane to the wall. This construction is
to be similar to another exisling 1,000 Ibf jib crane (L-shape) in the lab.

The pur- of this document is to perform a deslgn analysis for the proposed 2,000 lbfjib crane to determine suitable
sizes of members and configuration of the new jib crane assembly.
After construction, Ifthe as-built assembly differs from the 2,000 Ibf jib crane as proposed In thk document, a revision
of this analysis needs to be performed to confirm the acceptability of the as-built assembly.

2.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The following recommended materials. sizes,and dimensions are based on the deslgn factor of 5 spedtkd in DOE
(1993), and the guidelines provided in AlSC (1989).

I-
All structural materialsare recommended to be carbon steel A36 (ASTM 1097) and the pin material to be A325 steel.

2- The L-shaped jib crane is recommendedto be constructed from I-beam size W 12x40 (as minimum &e).

3- The assembly of the L-shaped I-beams and hinge connectionsshall be similar to that of the other exlsting 1.000 Ibf
jib crane (L-shape) or stiffer (see Figure 1) .

4- The edsting lower two brackets of the 1.000 Ibf jib crane to be replaced (about 5-R apart) shall be uwd In connecting
the new jib crane to the wall. The thickness of the upper and lower brackets of each support should be strengthened by
a IR-in. thick plate at the hole region. This will provides total thickness of l-in. for each bracket to satisfy the DOE
(1993) stress allowable (see Figure 2) .
5- The pln of each hinge shall be a minimum of l-in. diameter and made of A325 material.

6-All welds shall be fillet welds with the sizes shown in Fgures 14, or stronger. The recommended weld material is
ETOXX.

Sketches of the proposedjib crane assembly are shown in Figures 14. Final drawings should be developed and
approved. If the final as-built assembly is different from the proposed sizes,dimenslons. and conllguration; a revision of
this analysis needs to be performed to confirm the acceptability of the as-built structure.

I
Numatec Hanford Corp. Doc No. HNFJZas
EVALUATIONANALYSIS R.vwon: 9-

--
3.0 CONFIGURATIONAND MATERIAL
The coniigurahn of the proposed L-shaped 2.0001bf jib crane is illustrated in Fbure I.The crane la constructed of two
perpendicular I-beams, which are selected to be slze W 12x40 (stronger slzes can also be used but the beam weight
should not exceed 70 Ibflft). The boom (horkontal part) has a 20-R effecthre arm. The jib crane la attach4 to the two
exk;ting lower hinge brackets. A sketch of the modified bracket is illustrated in Fbure 2. The edrting h m e brackets
are made of I M n . thick plate. The brackets are welded to the wall by a 1IUn. all around Illletweld. The brackets are
modified by the addition of a IR-in. thick plate at the hole region on the outer upper and lower horlzontal surfaces.
The structural material of the new componenb is selected to be carbon steel A36, and the pin material la to be A325
(ASTM 1997). The yield strength of the A36 material is 38,000Ibflinz. and the mlnlmum ultimate tensile strength is
58,000 Ibflln2. The yield and ultimate strengths of the A325 material are 92,000 lbfllnZand 120,000 lbfAnz, respecthrely.

4.0 LOADING AND CRITERIA


The evaluation is based on the general construction and installation requirement8 of Hanford SIb Ho#ing end w i n g
Manual (DOE 1893), and the guidelines provided in the Manual of Steel Construction, Allowable Strm D d g n (AISC
1989).

4.1 LOADING

The loadlng on the 20-R boom (cantilever) is the jib crane rated load of 2,000 Ibf, and the boom (W 12x40 I-beam)
distributed weight of 40 lbflft (3.333 Ibflin). The boom weight is considered because It has dgniRcant contrlbullon to the
bending moment.

4.2 ALLOWABLE STRESSES AND LOADS

The allowable str- and loads are based on the deslgn factor of 5 on the ultlmate tensile strength of the mstehl
(DOE 1993). The shear strength is taken as 0.577 of the tensile strength (Von-Msen Criteria), which is condste~ntnrith
ductile material behavior. and gives allowable shear stress more conservative than the AlSC ratlo of 0.88 (see below).

Because the the jib crane is a steel structure, thus, the ratios between the different stress allowables in AlSC (1889)
can be applied to determine the shear and beating stress allowables in comparison to the tenslle stress allowable.

From AlSC (1888); the allowable tensile stress (Ft) is 0.8 of the yield strength,the allowable &ear stress (Fv) la 0.4 the
yield strength,and the allowable bearing stress (Fp) is 0.8 the yield strength.

Ratio of shear stress to tensile stress allowables = FvFt = 0.4/0.6 = 0.88 > 0.577 (thus 0.577 is used to obtain Fv).

Ratio of beating stress to tensile stress allowable3 = FpFt = 0.9m.8 = I .5

4.2.1 Allowable Stresses for Structural Components (A38 Material)

Fu :ISSOC0.- Ibf Ft :=-Fu


Ibf Allowable bending stress @nslle end compredw,
in2 5 Ft =11600*-
see nekl page)
in2

Fv = 6693 *-Ibf
FV := 0.577.R
Allowable shear stress
in2
Ibf
Fp = 174OO.-
Allowable beating stress
in2
L
Numatec Hanford Cop. Doc No. JiNF-3208
EVALUATION ANALYSIS Revidom 9-
PageNo. 3d /b
.-
cli.nt: WON& No. -M.WGO
S u b j
laeuiML00 M0-m.
L-M: .mildim mm w ~
a c t :

r HM.
a
p h l Lab

w . r h ~
s:* :
-
Ravh.d: By:
' Z A

The allowable compressive bending stress depends on the slenderness ratio (Vr,) of the flexural member (I-beam).
The AlSC (I 989), Section F I.3, provides formulas for different cases of slenderness ratio. When the unbraced length L
is greater than a specified value (defined below), the allowable compressive bending stress for the W 12x40 I-beam
is calculated in accordance with the following formulas of AlSC (1989).
Ibf
b f =&in Flange width Fy =36WO- Yield strength
in2
76.b f
L =-
Lc = 76x8/6 = 101.33 in (where Fy is 36 kips)
" &
L :=240.in Beam length, greater than L, of 101.33-h.

'T :=2.14.in Radius of gyration of compression flange plus 1/3 of compressionweb,


from I-beam properties tables in AlSC (1989).
_ --112
'T
For flexural memberswith compact or noncompactsections, and with unbraced lengths greater than Lc with an eds of
symmetryin, and loaded in the plane of their web. the allowable bending stress in compression (Fk) is shown below.

Cb:=l For cantilever beams; coefficient depends on end moments ratio.

51oooo'cb
The beam satisfies the following condition, ;(53.23< 112.15< 119.02).
'T FY
When L (24041.) exceeds L, (107.33-in.) and I/rT (112.15) is between the above values. the allowable compressive
bending stress is determined as the larger value from the following two equations.

a := lS3LXCOCOO-
Ibf
Dummy units for a constant given in the following equation.
in2

For any value of Ur,:


1
C1 :=2.9., CI=d/Af, ratio of depth to flange area (AISC 1989).
In
Ibf Dummy units for a constant given in the following equation.
c 2 := 12lxmxQ.-
in2

C2.c b
FbcZ :=- -----(2) lbf
L.C1 Fh.=17241*-
in
2 Second compressive bending stress allowable

Both F k l and Fk2 values of the above two equations are greater than Ft. Therefore, Ft of 11,600 Ibfhr? is used for
allowable tension and compression bending stresses.
J
Numatec Hanford Cop. Doc No. ILCLE-328s
EVALUATlONANALYSIS R.vi.lon:
PageNo. 4 d /6
cilant.: - WON& No. JilWGO
Suy.ct:
733.
IW Jib C n n s i l Lab
c z * g e L;c,
Loation: p R e By:

4.2.2 Allowable Shear Stress for Fillet Weld

Assume the weld electrode material is E70XX. The AISC (1989). Table J2.5, specifies the following shear stress
allowables for fillet welds.

Allowable shear stress for shear on effective area = 0.3 x Fu weld = 0.3 x 70,000 = 21,000 Ibf/in2
Allowable shear stress for tension or compression parallel to axis of weld = same as base metal

To be consistent with DOE (1993) and the derivation of the base metal allowables in the preceding sections, the
allowable shear stress for welds will be taken as the base metal allowables (consenrative).

Fvw :=Fv Ibf


Fvw = 6693 a- Allowable shear stress for weld
t :=0.25.in
in2

F, :=0.707.t w.Fvw F Ibf


--
= 1 I83 Allowable shear stress (per linear inch) for 1/4-in.
in fillet weld.

4.2.3 Allowable Stresses for Pin (A325 Material)


lbf
fup := 1 2 ~ . - Ultimate strength of pin material
in2
Ftp :=-fuP Ftp = 24000 lbf
e
- Allowable bending stress for pin
5 in2
Ibf
F v :=0.577.Ftp
~ F~p=13848*- Allowable shear stress for pin
in2

5.0 ANALYSIS

The analysiswas performed by conventional hand calculations using formulas from Roark (1975), Bruhn (I
965), Ricker
(Iggl), Shigley, and Blodgett (1982).

5.1 JIB CRANE BOOM (W 12X 40 I-BEAM)

The bending moment is calculated for the 2,000 Ibf at 240411. (from the wall), end for the distributed weight of the boom
( ~ 3 . 3 3Ibfhnfor the I-beam). Thk moment k consewalive for the boom and its weld connection to the box.

P =2000,lbf w ,= 3.333333.E (40 Ibf/fI of I-beam) L :=240.in


in
M :=P.L+-w.L2
2 M =576oOo*in~lbf Moment at bed end

S := 5 1 .Sin3 Modulus of section

Ob :=-M
S
Bending stress is less than bending stress allowable of 11,600 Ibf/in2.

4
Numatec Hanford Corp. Da No. HtiF-3288
EVALUATIONANALYSIS RdJon: e
PapNo. ~!LL&&-

5.2 HINGE BRACKETS

The results of a preliminaryanalysis indicatedthat the brackets (at the pin hole region) need to be thicker than the
original thickness of 0.5in. in order to satisfy the shear and bearing stress allowables. It is recommendedto
strengthen the brackets by welding (0.25in. fillet weld) a 0.5in. plate to the upper and lower outermost horizontal
surfaces of each bracket at the hole region. The welded plates need to follow the contour of the brackets and to allow
sufficientdistances from the outside edges to facilitate the welding on the outside of the added plate (no weld on the
hole surface). The modified bracket configuration is presentedin Figure 2.

The moment M (576,000 in.lbf) produces a couple that generates action and reaction forces (F) in the two brackets.
The distance between the centerlines of the brackets is 5-R (60-in.).

The bracket at the hole region should be checked for the follohhg failure modes.

1- Tension failure at sides of hole.

2- Double shear failure.

3- Bearing failure.

4- Tearing tension failure or hoop tension failure.

5- Compliance with dishing failure.

Bruhn (1965), Ricker (1991). and Shigiey (1983) have slightly different approaches in dealing with shear, bearing, and
tearing tension failures.

5.2.1 Tension Failure

The modified bracket is 1&


.ni. thick, and the side distance from the hole to the edge is about 1. O h . (see mure below).

t = I.0.h Plate thickness

Side length for tension stress

Tension area

Distance between brackets

F :=_M
L1
F = 9600 -1bf Force on bracket

f t :=- F
A Pt
lbf
f t =4800*- Tensile stress is less than 11,600 Ibfln2allowable stress.
in2
5
Numatec Hanford Corp. Doc No. MF-3288
EVALUATIONANALYSIS RevMn: e
-No. 3sL&
u i.:- WOlJob No. JlW'GD
Subject Jib CRm &W
. &&d
, Lab
m.
Lmtiom R.vkd:

5.2.2 Double Shear Failure

L S .=l.O.in
'
Shear distance to edge

Shear area

Ibf Shear stress is less than allowable shear stress of 6,693 Ibfln2.
f =4800.-
in2

5.2.3 Bearing Failure

D := I.0.h Pin diameter

Apb :=D.t

Bearing area

f '=- F
P'
A Pb
fp=9600--Ibf Bearing stress k less than 17,400 Ibfhn2 allowable bearing stress.
in*

5.2.4 Tearing Tension Failure

This failure occurs when the pin diameter k smaller than the hole diameter.

a) Shigley (19830 states that this failure is avolded by spacing the hole at least I.5 diameter from the margin (edge).

I.5 x d = 1.5 x 1.O = I.5 in, this k more than 1.Mn. distance from the edge. Thus, check the tearing tendon failure.

b) Ricker (I991) assumes that the tear resulted from a bending stress in section between the hole and the boundary.
Assume that a block of 0.8xd in length, e In height, and have the same plate thickness. The block performs as a
fixed-ends beam (see sketch on previous page).
e =l.O.in Height or distance to edge
Ld ~ 0 . 8 . D Ld=l.k Beam length
2
t.e 1
s =-
s=o*in
3 Modulus of section
6
F,L d
MI =-
8
Bending moment
M1 =960.in.lbf
6
Nurnatec Hanford Corp. Doc No. J3NF-3286
EVALUATIONANALYSIS uwirlon: 9-
P.WNO. 7 o( /6
CIht .- WON& No. W O O
-%+buS L.b
blEdwb Mcx33.
Rniud:

Ibf Bending stress is less than allowable stress of 11,600 Ibfln2.


f = 5760.-
2
in
c) Bruhn (1965) states that failure due to shear out and bearing (tearing) are closely related and are covered by a single
calculation based on empirical cwves. The allowable load ( P d may be expressed as a function of the allowable stress

A pb = 1 .in 2 Bearing area

K bv := 1.4 Shear bearing factor based on


t/D4 .O, and e/D=l.5 (see curve) .

lbf Allowable tensile stress


Ft=11600--
in2

Pta:=Kb,,,.ApEFt
Allowable load k greater than
P ta = 16240 .Ibf the acting load of 9,600 Ibf.

5.2.5Dishing Failure (Out-of-Plane Buckling) 0.1 1.0 ?.E l.E 2.1 l.P U 4.0
r5
Ricker (1991) stated that dishing can be prevented by having the plate thickness equal or greater than 0.25 the
diameter, but never less than 0.5in. The bracket satisfies this condition. Therefore, dishing is not a concern.

5.3 HINGE PIN

The existing pin has l-in. diameter. The bracket does not have enough distance to the front edge to Increase the pin
diameter. Besides, it is not easy to machinethe bracket hole because it is welded to the wall structure. Therefore,
the pin diameter is restrictedto l i n . diameter.

Each pin is subjected to a force of 9,600 Ibf. The pin is checked for shear and bending stresses (the bearing stress is
enveloped by the bracket). Preliminarycalculations Indicatedthat the pin should be made out of material stronger
than A36 carbon steel. Thus, the pin material needs to be A325 or stronger.

5.3.1 Shear Stress

First assume the pin will fall under double shear.

Ap - .in2
i Pin area

fsp :=- F
2.A
Ibf
f =6112*- Double shear stress is not conservative. because the load is not uniform.
sp
in2
7
Numatec Hanford COT. Doc No. mF-3286
EVALUATION ANALYSIS Rddom 9-
Page NO. &CLI%
crtmt:. - WOlJob No. N l W G O
Subjct: m i a n I H
Mom.
L o a t h -s733 -til w:
Second, assume that the rotation of the crane (due to the bending moment) will cause the 9.600 Ibf load
to act as a concentrated load on the pin, see sketch below. Therefore, the pin will be under single shear.
This is a conservative representation for thii application.

f spd = I2223 .-Ibf Single shear stress k less than 13,848 Ibfhn2allowable shear stress.
in*

5.3.2 Bending stress

In general static tests of single bolt frttings will not show a failure due to bolt bending failure. Beddes, ilk not known
exactly how the load k distributed to the pin nor the relative deformations of the pin and the members. However, it is
important that sufficient bending strength k provided to prevent permanent bending deformation so that bolts can be
readily removed in maintenance operations.

Assume simply supported beam with concentrated load as shown in the sketch below, with a maximum clearance of
0.125-in applied on one side, and the gap between the pin and the hinge on the left is not closed.

a =0.125in Distancefrom close support (Clearance)

b =5.37S.in Dktance from far support

L
P
=s.s.in Length of pin between supports (inside of the bracket)

R :F.- b
LP
Reactionforce
R =9382*Ibf
M ,=R.a
P'
Mp=1173*in.lbf Maximum bending moment at point of load
32.Mp
fbp:=-
II. D3

fbp-11945'- Ibf
Bending stress k less than the allowable bending stress of 24,000 Ibfhnz.
in2
\\
ILS (cle.traMte)

6 t-ac ket

8
Numatec Hanford Corp. Doc No. MF-3286
EVALUATIONANALYSIS urvh(on: p-
-No. JULLA
Clknt..- WolJDb No. M H G D
S u w ICI J ib I Lab me: i w i m ~ y :

Location: avlldirn Mom LakJWE Area Hanfofd. Washinaton By:

5.4WELDS

This section evaluatesthe welds of the crane assembly. The weld that joins the the hinge bracket to the wall is an
existing 1/44n. fillet weld. The other welds are to be sized to support the crane loads. The welds were evaluated
according to formulas obtained from Blcdgett (1982) and the guidelines of AlSC (1989).

5.4.1 Welds of Hinge Support

This is an ehting l/din. fillet weld (see Figure 2).

The normal load on the weld is 9,600 Ibf (load per bracket to react the moment).

A, .=22.15in Weld area per unit thickness (5+5+6.375+6.375)

fhw :=- F
A,
Ibf Shear stress (per linear length) for tension load
fhw -422.-
in
The shear load 01) on the weld is the 2,000 Ibf plus the beam weight (see Section 5.1).

V:=P+wL

V = 2800 4bf Shear force, assuming only one support carries the shear load

f,:=-
V
A,
Ibf
f, = 123.- Shear stress (per linear length) for shear load
in

f ,= 440--
Ibf
in
Resultant shear stress (per linear length) is less than 1,183 lbflin allowable weld stress
for 0.25411. fillet weld.

5.4.2 Welds Connecting Boom (I-Beam) to Box

The two I-beams are connectedtogether through a box-shaped structure as shown In Fbure I.The boom is welded to
one side of the box-shape structure around b contour. A 3/41n. thick plate is welded to the top surface of the box and
the I-beam by a 3/Bin. fillet weld around the plate ddes (on the bottom). The box-shape is constructed from 3/4-in.
thick plateswith the web plate welded to the four dde plates by a 5/%n. fillet welds on both sides.
The weld dimensions and section properties appear in Figure 3. Bottom weld (at point "a") is the critical location.
2
A, 1~24.32.h Total weld area

J \v = 945.6.i~~ Polar moment of inerb'a

9
Numatec Hanford Cow. Dos No. MF-32LIB
EVALUATION ANALYSIS Rwlsion: e
Paw No. 10 of /A
Client:. - WOlJob No. NlWGD
Subjct:0m.2-
l#lwu50-733.
IW Jib C w d a G t t l Lab
cs:m* : z.LA%
* h
Loation: -Rw!J!J Mo-733 inaton RevIsd w:
c Y ',=9.o.in Vertical distance from point "a" to neutral axis

Horizontal distance from point "a" to neutral axis


c :=3.33.in
M.C M = 576,000 in.lbf (Section 5.1)
f & :=-
JW

lbf
f & =5482*- Horizontaltorsional shear stress
in*
M.C
f, :=-
JW

f ,
= 2028
Ibf
*-
2
Vertical torsional shear stress
in

f v l :=-
V
Vertical shear stress
Awl
Ibf
f v l -115'-
in2

f, :=JfSh2+ (f,+fVI)2

Ibf
f ~ = 5886.- Shear stress on weld is less than the 6,693Ibflin' allowable shear stress.
in2

5.4.3Welds in Box-Shaped Connedon


The web plate is welded to the side plates by a 5/84. fillet weld. All plates are 3/44n. thick. The length of each side is
12-in. long. Assume the length of the welds on each internal side is 1OS-in. long (see sketch below).

Weld horizontal length

Weld vertical length


(cosetvative)
V h : = -M
dV
Shear force in weld (V,=VJ

Fillet weld size

Ibf Shear stress in weld is less than 6,693Ibf/in2allowable shear stress.


f h b x = 591 2 '-
in2
10
Numatec Hanford Cow. Ibs No. M F J Z O
EVALUATION ANALYSIS R* J-

CIW. -
-No.
W W k b No. M Q D
d
~~:~
InBuMhu Morn.
tab
Ch227- E
&Lu!&$.-
W d 7AeL
L c u t b m p R.v*d: w.
5.4.4 WELD OF HINGE PLATE

The loads are the same as those in Section 5.4.1 above. Take the plate thickness to be 3 U n . and the fillet weld size
to be W n . (to be In proportion with other plates). The depth of the plate should not be lees than 5.2541. long to allow
for the I B i n . madmum clearance between the hinge and the inside space of the support plates (5.37541. distance).

tq
,, :=0.375.in Weld size Lw2 :=4.5.in Length of vertical weld8 only (conwnrathm,
because ii neglects the effect of the
A,,Q : : 2 . t a L e 0 . 7 0 7 horizontal plate). see sketch on previous page.
A w 2 = 2 . h2 Area of weld
fhw2:=- F
Aw2

f = 4023 .-lbf Shear stress for tension load


in2
fvw2':- V
Aw2

f vw2 = 1 173 -Ibfin


2
Shear stress for shear load

._ J 7 2
fw2 .- hw2 +fvw2
lbf
fw2=4191-- Shear stress kr less than 6.693 Ibf/ln2allowable shear stress.
in2

5.5 ANALYSIS RESULTS

The stress analysis results show that all proposed component sizes and dimensions (as shown In Fuures 14) are
acceptable. The proposed sizes of I-beams and welds are minimum requirements. Any sizm larger than those
proposed are acceptable (provided that the weight of the beam does not exceed 70 Ibfm) and will provide larger margins
of safely beyond the factor of 5 on ultimate strength.

The exktlng wall support brackets should be modified by welding a IR-ln. thick plate on each of the top surfaceof the
upper bracket and the bottom surface of the lower bracket at the pin hole region. The erdsting IR-in. thkk brackets can
not satisfy the allowable shear and bearing stresses developed from the 2.000 Ibf and the wdght of the jib crane boom.

The hinge pins need to be made of steel A325 or stronger to satisfy the required allowable stresees that are based on a
factor of 5 on the ultimate strength of the materlal.

Figures 14 represent the main features and dimensions of the proposed jib crane. The condusions and
recommendationsare presented in Section 2.0.

Final drawings need to be developed. If the Rnal as built structure is different from the proposed design, a revised stress
analysis needs to be performedto verify the changes.

11
Numatec Hanford Corp. Doc No. NF-3286
EVALUATIONANALYSIS u.vhkn: _e

5.5 REFERENCES

AISC, 1989," Manual of Steel Construction, Allowable Stress Design," American InstiMe of Steel Construction, Inc.,
9 th. edib'on. Chicago, Illinois.

ASTM. 1997," Annual Book of ASTM Standards," American Society of Testing and Materials," Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania.

Blodgett, 0. W., 1982." Design of Welded Structures," The James F. Lincoln Arc Welding Foundation, 12 th. Printing,
Cleveland, Ohio.

Bruhn, E. F., 1965," Analysis and Design of Fliiht Vehicle Structures," ThState Offset Company, Cincinnati, Ohio.

DOE, 1993," Hanford Site Hoisting and Rigging Manual," DOE-RL-92-36, Section 12.0. Richland, Washington.

Ricker. David t., 1991," Design and Construction of Lifting Beams," Journal of American Institute of Steel Construction,
Fourth Quarter, p. 149-158.

Roark. R. J., 1975," Formulas for Stress and Strain," Fiih Edtion, McGrow-Hill Book Company, New York, New York.

Shigley. J. E., 1983," Mechanical Engineering Design," 4 th. Edtion. McGrow-Hill Company, New York, New York.

12
Numatec Hanford Cop. Doc No. JiNF-3286
EVALUATION ANALYSIS RNIrlon: 9-
13 d / L

zr-7
Pap.No.
.-
CI*nt WON& No. -&WGD
suyrt: P ma: m ; ~ ~ ~ I+ .-LA~
Chclud:
Loation: Hanford. Washinaton R& Bv:

Figure 1: Configurationof the Proposed 2,000 Ibf Jib Crane.

I f

$
- I 0 4

--I=

I .
I

SEE FIGURES 2-.q_ .. ,.. __

. . .. .
.~ . . ~ . . .
.. /r .. -, . ..~.,
. . ..
~ . . . . . ....;...I-:.IX
. . . . ..

,. . . .. . . .4
. . . ! .,.
. .

13
Nurnatec Hanford Corp. D x No, HNF-3286
EVALUATIONANALYSIS Re4rion: -0-.

Manin Hanfod. Gorp.


-No.
WWJob No. JjjWGD
14 of /L -
Client
Subjw. Dssion Anabis d 2.033 Ibl Jib Cnne in Chemical Lab
in Bulldim
Location: E-
MO-733.
A rea Hanford. Washindon
Date: loll I
Chakea?
Revid
BV: H. H . Z W ~ f f w -
By: L. J. J u M
w
e H.LL

Figure 2: Modified Bracket Configuration.

. .

. . . . . . .
.
.~
. ~.
~.
. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . .
. . . . . . . . . ~~ -1
..
. . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . -1
. . . . . . . . . .:.. . . . . .
.
~..;
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -1
. (EXjST5).- .... i_ .
.....
->
.:.
..2, .--I
~. . . . . . > . .
. .:i
~

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
~_'
~

.......... ................. .
.. . . . . .
. . . .
~

.~. i
..-_ ..
~

........ . .-..I
. . . . .
.......... :I ,:.::::I I
..
. . .
.- -\"
: - . ' 1 .. . .
. . . .
. . . . . . .
..
. . . ...

14
Numatec Hanford Cop. Doc NO.HNF-32e4
EVALLJATlONANALYSIS R.*irion:

Figure 3: Proprties of Weld Connecting Boom (I-Beam) to Box.

1,x

I YY
Numatec Hanford Corp. Doc No. HNF-3288
EVALUATIONANALYSIS R d m :

Figure 4: Configuration of Hinge and Box.

3v
'8

........ -. .- . . . . ,_ . . . . .
W..... 12%40
4. .......
3/y
- -. -.
.I_

. .
,. ,.
..
. . . . . .
_. . . .
. -. . - . . . . . . . .
. . . . . i . . .
. . .
~

...
. . . . . . .
12
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

...........

16
DISTRIBUTION SHEET

To Page 1 of 1
Distribution
Date August 25, 1999
Project TitleMlork Order
IDesign Analysis of 2,000 lb. Crane for Chemical Laboratory EDT No. 625110
1 ECN NO. N/A
Attach”
TextAll
With EDT/ECN
Text Only Appendix
Name MSlN Attach. Onlv Only

Lockheed Martin Hanford Corporation


J. J. Elsen 57-24 X I
0. M. Jaka 57-24 X
L . J. Julyk R1-56 X
I M . R. Koch I 57-54 I x I I I
C. W. Peoples 57-20 X
5 . €IRifaey
. R1-56 X
R. L. Schlosser R1-56 X
M. C. Tipps 57-34 X
( w . G. Zuroff I I

I Numatec Hanford CorDoration I I I I I

A-6000-1 35 (10/97)