×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Below-the-Hook Devices & Lift Hook Contact Stresses

Below-the-Hook Devices & Lift Hook Contact Stresses

Below-the-Hook Devices & Lift Hook Contact Stresses

(OP)
I am designing a spreader bar to lift 15,000lbs with a safety factor of 3 when considering yield stress. This spreader bar will be made from a laser cut piece of 1" thick A36 steel plate. The customer's crane has a typical 8~10 ton Crosby swivel hook, and I have located an elongated oval hole in the plate for this hook to engage the plate.

I am using ASME BTH-1-2008 "Design of Below-the-Hook Lifting Deveices" as well as ASME B30.20-2006 as my design standards. My problem is that nowhere in these standards is there any mention of how to handle the contact stresses between a curved hook and the hole thru my plate. "Common sense" and past experience/observation tells me that the 1" plate is more than capable of handling the load and that the plate will locally deform at the two "point contact" locations until the contact pressure applied by the hooks to the plate is resulting in something around the yield stress level. Be bottom line is that the plate will be "OK".

Does anyone know of something authoritative I can point to in my engineering calculation write-up that backs up my claim that the hook contact stress as described is OK. If I need to treat the Hook-to-plate contact as a "pinned connection" I can do this, but because of the formal write-up required, I need to point to something that says this assumption/simplification is acceptable by industry, etc. (By the way simply putting a shackle in between the hook and the plate to give me a true pinned connection is not acceptable because of the customer's application)

Any ideas would be helpful. (Normally I don't try to get so "wrapped around the axle" this much, there's no getting away from it this time. :) )  

RE: Below-the-Hook Devices & Lift Hook Contact Stresses

What we did in our heavy steel fabrication plant was to increase the widths at the eyes of the lifting beam by fillet welding additional 1" thick plates on both sides of the eyes.
While it was more than required as you pointed out in your statement "...Common sense and past experience/observation tells me that the 1" plate is more than capable of handling the load... " after a period of constant use, the lifting beam eyes will show metal compaction and wear.

RE: Below-the-Hook Devices & Lift Hook Contact Stresses

RE: Below-the-Hook Devices & Lift Hook Contact Stresses

Formulae for contact stresses between two surfaces s/b extensively presented in ME handbooks such as Kent "Design and Production".  In your case, contact stresses would be between a cylinder such as a shackle pin thru the eyelet and the internal concave surface presented by the eyelet.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources