• No results found

Lifting Lug

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "Lifting Lug"

Copied!
9
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)

JOB/ITEM NO. : CLIENT : PLANT LOCATION :

ENGINEER : pr Checked : 1. STRESSES BASED ON AISC-ASD

Date :06/22/09 Revision : A 2. DESIGN LOADS HAVE BEEN INCREASED BY DESIGN FACTOR.

TOTAL LIFTED LOAD 55 kips Considered a LIGHT Package!

PLATE THICK t= 1.000 inches PLATE WIDTH b= 5.313 inches HOLE DIAM DIA= 2.125 inches

PLATE RADIUS 2.657 inches

BOTTOM OF PLATE TO TOP OF FRAME d= 2.50 inches 1.25 Dynamic Impact factor (Fh)

TOP OF FRAME TO CENTER OF RADIUS h= 2.75 inches 1.05 Consequence factor

FY 50.00 ksi 1.03 Weight factor

SLING ANGLE W/ HORIZONTAL 45 deg 1.03 Tilt & Yaw factor

FILLET WELD SIZE 0.438 of an inch 1.00 Skew Load factor (Heavy lifts only!)

DESIGN FACTOR 1.40 1.40 Generally Accepted Min Design Factor

ASSUME OUT OF PLANE LOADING 5 %

DO YOU INTEND TO USE A SPREADER BAR? YES Loads Proportioned for 0.6 x Total Lift Load per pair of lugs DESIGN LOAD PER LIFTING LUG Pvert = 23.10 kips

DESIGN LOAD PER LIFTING LUG Ph = 23.10 kips these are factored SWL Sling Load = Shackle SWL = 32.67 kips

CHECK STRESS IN HORZ. PLANE AT PIN ASD cl ref

NET AREA An=(b-DIA)*t 3.19 in2 NET SECTION Sxn=t*b2/6-t*DIA2/6 3.95 in3 Syn=(b-DIA)*(t2)/6 0.53 in3 SHEAR fv = Ph/An 7.25 ksi SHEAR RESULTANT fvr =(fv2+(PER/100*fv)2)0.5 7.25 ksi

SHEAR ALLOWABLE Fv = 0.4Fy 20.00 ksi (EQU, F4-1)

SHEAR STRESS RATIO 0.36

TENSION ft = Pvert/An 7.25 ksi IN PLANE BENDING STRESS = 0

OUT OF PLANE fbo = PER/100*b*Pvert/Syn 11.55 ksi RESULTANT AXIAL STRESS far = ft + fbo 18.80 ksi

TENSION ALLOWABLE Ft = 0.6Fy 30.00 ksi (EQU, D1)

TENSION STRESS RATIO 0.63

COMBINED STRESS f = (far2+3*fvr2)0.5 22.61 ksi # COMBINED STRESS ALLOW Fa = 0.66Fy 33.00 ksi

COMBINED STRESS RATIO @ PIN 0.69

CHECK BEARING ON PLATE AT PIN

SHACKLE PIN DIAMETER from Crosby Tab below 1.5 inches PIN SWL = 34 kips, Shackle Pin Dia OK! SHACKLE PIN DIAMETER = DIA1, User Input 1.5 inches

BEARING AREA Ap = DIA1*t 1.500 in2

Note: In General FPBW are required BEARING STRESS fp = SL/Ap 21.78 ksi for all but light lifts!! & recommended BEARING STRESS ALLOW = 0.9FY 45.00 ksi (EQU, J8-1) min safety factor of 2.0 applied.

BEARING STRESS RATIO 0.48 DESIGN WELD SIZE BASED ON 0.33Fu = 21.5 ksi

AND ELASTIC METHOD

CHECK STRESS IN PLANE BELOW PIN e = 4.190 e=((d/2)*2*d+2*b+d*b)/(2*d+3*b)+h

AREA A=b*t 5.31 in2 Lw = 20.94 Lw=2*(b+d)+b SECTION Sx=t*b2/6 4.70 in3 Ix = 30.61 Ix=2*b*(e-h)2+b*(d-(e-h))2+2*d3/12 Sy=b*(t2)/6 0.89 in3 Iy = 72.78 Iy=2*d*(b/2)2+3*b3/12

SHEAR fv = Ph/A 4.35 ksi Ip = 103.39 Ip=Ix+Iy

SHEAR RESULTANT fvr =(fv2

+(PER/100*fv)2

)0.5 4.35 ksi fx = .28

fx=Pvert*PER/100*e*d/2/Ix, (see ##)

SHEAR ALLOWABLE Fv = 0.4Fy 20.00 ksi f'x = 1.58 f'x=Ph/Lw, (see ##)

SHEAR STRESS RATIO 0.22 f"x = 0.99 f"x=(Ph*e*(d-(e-h)))/Ip, (see ##)

f'y = 1.58 f'x=Pvert/Lw, (see ##)

TENSION ft = Pvert/A 4.35 ksi f"y = 3.56 f"y=(Ph*e*b/2)/Ip, (see ##)

IN PLANE BENDING STRESS = Ph*h/Sx 13.50 ksi f = 5.75 f=SQRT((f'x+f"x)2+(f'y+f"y)2+fx2)

OUT OF PLANE fbo = PER/100*b*Pvert/Sy 10.52 ksi 0.378 Weld Size=f/(21.5*SIN(45*PI()/180))

RESULTANT AXIAL STRESS far = ft + fbo 28.37 ksi 0.4375

TENSION ALLOWABLE Ft = 0.6Fy 30.00 ksi Weld Size = 7/16 INCHES

TENSION STRESS RATIO 0.95 S.R. = 0.86 ## (design factor of 2 used)

COMBINED STRESS f = (far2+3*fvr2)0.5 29.35 ksi # Weld f.o.s = 2.47 COMBINED STRESS ALLOW Fa = 0.66Fy 33.00 ksi

COMBINED STRESS RATIO BELOW PIN 0.89

Additional Notes # - the formula used to combine these stresses is equ (3-37) from ASME BTH-1-2005 with fy =0 INPUT IN SHADED GREEN & RED AREAS

FRAME LIFTING LUG (ASSUMES 4 LIFT LUGS)

DESIGN FACTOR made up from

LUG LAYOUT

NOTE : this is for a welded side plate, for top welded lugs d = the plate thickness!!

Warning, tmax ≤ 1.904 inches AND, tmin ≥ 1.428 inches

DESIGN VALID!

Confirm with ASME min F.O.S Req'd The min Factor of Safety for the design as noted F.O.S = 2.23 Must Comply with the requirements of ASME

BTH-1-2005 Chapter 3-1.2

NOTE: for Category A lifts, Min F.O.S is 2.0 - 2.5 for lug and for Category B lifts, Min F.O.S is 3.0 - 3.6 for the lug.

d b h SL ANGLE Ph Pv Weld Weld Welds Equipment t

(2)

JOB/ITEM NO. : CLIENT : PLANT LOCATION :

ENGINEER : pr Checked : 1. STRESSES BASED ON AISC-ASD

Date : 06/22/09 Revision : A 2. DESIGN LOADS HAVE BEEN INCREASED BY DESIGN FACTOR.

Lifting lug Info

TOTAL LIFTED LOAD 55 kips Considered a LIGHT Package!

PLATE THICK t= 1.000 inches HOLE DIAM DIA= 2.125 inches PLATE WIDTH b= 5.31 inches

SLING ANGLE W/ HORIZONTAL 45 deg

DESIGN FACTOR 1.40

ASSUME OUT OF PLANE LOADING 5 %

DO YOU INTEND TO USE A SPREADER BAR? YES Loads Proportioned for 0.6 x Total Lift Load per pair of lugs DESIGN LOAD PER LIFTING LUG Pvert = 23.10 kips

DESIGN LOAD PER LIFTING LUG Ph = 23.10 kips these are factored SWL Sling Load = Shackle SWL = 32.67 kips

YES Use!

Min Shackle Dia size based on SWL = 1.50 inches SWL = 34.00 kips, (for the Users Info). User Requested Shackle Dia = 1.5 inches SWL = 34.00 kips, (this row's info is used)

by User by SWL Possible Warnings!! A 2.38 2.38 Packing plates req'd to make up gap

B 1.63 1.63 C 5.75 5.75 D 1.5 1.5 E 3.88 3.88 F 3.63 3.63 H 10 10 L 6.88 6.88 N 1.62 1.62 P 7.73 7.73 Weight (lbs)

NOT USED!

Min Shackle Dia size based on SWL = 1.50 inches SWL = 60.00 kips, (for the Users Info). User Requested Shackle Dia = 1.5 inches SWL = 60.00 kips

by User by SWL A 2.38 2.38 B 3.62 3.62 C 1.62 1.62 D 1.63 1.63 E 5.75 5.75 F 1.39 1.39 G 6.88 6.88 H 7.75 7.75 J 10 10 K 3.88 3.88 L 1.54 1.54 Weight (lbs) 20.8 20.8

Crosby Forged Anchor Shackles, G-2130 S-2130

Crosby Alloy Anchor Shackles, G-2140 S-2140

tmax ≤ 1.904 inches AND, tmin ≥ 1.428 inches bmax ≤ 13.13 inches AND, bmin ≥ 5.313 inches

FRAME LIFTING LUG SHACKLE Type & Size

0 0 0

20.8 20.8

INPUT IN SHADED GREEN & RED AREAS

(3)

reference EM/039 Rev 3 1991

1.25

Offshore LIFT

Recommended

2.5

2.0

1.3

Dynamic Amplification Factors (Fh) for MEDIUM Packages

Dynamic Amplification Factors (Fh) for LIGHT Packages

Offshore lift lower

Bound

OnShore Lift

Bound

Offshore lift Upper

(165kips) (1100kips) (2200kips) 2200 110 22 4400 1100 220

(KIP

S

)

(4)

reference EM/039 Rev 3 1991

On Shore

ALL

22,000

5,500

2,200

DAF for module weights between the values given above, should be calculated by a

linear interpolation.

ALL

Lift Weight

(kips)

Table form of the Graph above

1.05

1.1

1.2

1.25

SEE Graph above

SLING DAF

Dynamic Amplification Factors (Fh) for HEAVY Packages

DESIGN

COMPLETION

Off Shore

4,400

8,800

13,200

17,600

22,000

(5)

reference EM/039 Rev 3 1991

(6)

reference EM/039 Rev 3 1991

(7)

reference EM/039 Rev 3 1991

(8)

reference EM/039 Rev 3 1991

(9)

reference EM/039 Rev 3 1991

JIP, Joint Industry Project

HEEREMA DnV MICOPERI SHELL OXY BP AMOCO CHEVERON NOBLE

(1983) (1985) (1985) SOLE PIPER BRUCE CATS ALBA DENTON

PIT (1990) (1990) (1990) (1990) (1990) (1988)

NOTES: 1. Factor not quoted, but assumed for this comparison table. 2. Factor used, but not quoted and assumed for this comparison table.

3. Skew load factor can be reduced to 1.25 min by use of curves, depending upon measured sling lengths. 4. Factor based on average of factors for structural and equipment.

5. Sling DAF varies linearly with the module weight, from 1.2 at 5,500kips to 1.15 at 13,200kips . 7. Tilt factor assumed if tilt is 1% or less.

8. Factor can be reduced to 1.02 after weighing.

BP LOC AMOCO CHEVERON HEEREMA NOBLE

BRUCE (1991) CATS ALBA (1990) DENTON

(1990) (1990) (1990) (1990)

NOTES: 1. Based upon average of factors for structural and equipment/outfitting.

4. Factor assumed for this comparison table. Factor should be calculated by static's based upon C.G position and allowable tilt. 5. Sling DAF varies linearly with the module weight, from 1.15 at 13,200kips to 1.10 at 22,000kips

6. Yaw included in DAF and Skew factors. Range of Module Weights (kips) Weight Factor (PRE-AFC)(4) C.G Shift B C D Factor 1.25 1.50 1.25 1.50 1.00 A A(5) D.A.F (Slings) Skew loads Factor 1.10 1.15 1.15 1.50 1.50 F 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Tilt 1.10 Range of Module Weights (kips) A Weight Factor (PRE-AFC)(1) B 1.15 1.125 E 1.05 1.03 1.10/1.15 Factor 22,000/13,200 1.08 10.50 1.05 1.05 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.15/1.20 1.15/1.20 AxBxCxD 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.50 1.25 1.50 1.50 1.05 1.05 1.05(2) 1.05 1.02(8) 1.175 1.175 1.13 1.15 1.15 1.77/1.85 1.00 1.05 1.03(7) 1.25 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.05(2) 1.00 1.66 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.62 2.23/2.33 1.175 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.25 1.10 BRV JIP (1991) Lift Criteria Comparison- Dual Lifts, HEAVY LIFTS

1.99 1.90 1.51 1.90 1.99 13,200/5,500 >5,500 >17,600 >2,200 >5,500 >5,500 >5,500 >5,500 1.90 1.90

Lift Criteria Comparison- Single Crane Lifts, HEAVY LIFTS

B(3) BRV JIP (1991) >5,500 >,2200 >5,500 >5,500 >5,500 >5,500 13,200/5,500 1.08 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.00 1.15(1) 1.15(1) 1.15(1) 1.00(6) 1.00 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.05 1.03(4) 1.44 1.38 1.44/1.51 1.50 1.58 1.58 1.64 Tilt Factor Yaw Factor 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.10 1.00 D.A.F (Slings) C Skew loads D C.G Shift Factor E 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.10 1.00 H AxBxCxDxExFxG F Torsion Factor G Factor

References

Related documents

Compacting at water contents higher than the optimum water content results in a relatively dispersed soil structure that is weaker, more ductile, less porous, softer, more

Four questions related to critical thinking to consider as business educators:?. What does it mean to

Subordinate hypotheses were formulated based upon the types of financial social learning opportunities (frequency of discussing finances with parents, frequency of discussing

Calin and colleagues showed that spe- cific miRNAs were downregulated in circulating mononucle- ar cells from chronic lymphocytic leukaemia patients and identified a 13-miRNA

In relation to the issues mentioned, the following research questions have been formulated: Research question 1: What are the challenges and needs to improve existing

Next, studying self-organization processes with the surface pattern formation in a system of interacting adsorbate at molecular beam epitaxy, we use the formalism of nonlinear

selected bentonites (B1-B7) tested showed better AFB1 adsorption percentages than

In this study, a higher sense of life purpose did explain better performance on processing speed when participants endorsed more mental health issues, which means that the