×
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

Rigging Beam
3

Rigging Beam

Rigging Beam

(OP)
I am unclear on the impact factor used for a trolley beam or hoist beam design. In the past, I have used 25% impact for design, since everything below the hook will be proof tested for 125% capacity, however, if everything below the hook is tested elsewhere, does the hoist beam itself have to be designed for 125% of its marked capacity?

Thanks

RE: Rigging Beam

that sounds really low to me ... impact factors are typically 2.

and wouldn't the beam be designed for a much higher safety factor ? (3? 4??, from Health and Safety codes ??)

another day in paradise, or is paradise one day closer ?

RE: Rigging Beam

2
TennStructural: If you're in the US then OSHA requires that all new or modified cranes (which includes monorails and trolley beams) be load tested to no more than 125% of their rated capacity. https://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_docu...

You might also want to get a copy of ASME B30.2 or CMAA Specification 74 depending on what you're looking at designing. I would actually not use ASME BTH-1 for a trolley beam as that is intended for "below the hook" (BTH) items such as lifting beams. Trolleys and monorails I would typically design to ASCE 7 (see section 4.9) and AISC 360 (the steel book) with some consideration of ASME B30.2 or CMAA Specification 74 as applicable. Some additional consideration should be given to load location (below the flange) and torsion in the beam from side loading or swinging loads, trolley beam bracing (especially in cantilevered monorails), and bottom flange bending under trolley wheel loads (this often controls for monorails but is mostly a serviceability concern).

rb1957: This is a common misconception that leads people to overload cranes and lifting beams that are (correctly) not designed to really large factors of safety. Most bridge cranes, monorails, spreader beams, and such are designed for a safety factor of 1.6 to 2 (for flexure, sometimes higher per ASME BTH-1) and generally impact isn't even considered in the case of hand-geared trolleys or relatively benign lifting conditions. The items that are rated higher includes lifting hardware; hoists, chains, wire rope. These are all rated for a much higher safety factor.

Maine EIT, Civil/Structural.

RE: Rigging Beam

(OP)
Thanks for the quick responses. I have a pretty good grasp on BTH component design and testing. I was mainly wondering if OSHA has specific design criteria for Above the hook rigging hardware. I understand that there is some factor of safety in ordinary steel design, given by ASD or LRFD design methods.

If the BTH components are going to be proof tested on the hoist beam, I would design the beam for the test load. Since the BTH components are already qualified, can I design the above the hook beam for 100% of the rated capacity, in accordance with standard ASD or LRFD methods? Does OSHA have a specific impact factor to use for the hoist beam (not spreader beam)?

RE: Rigging Beam

(OP)
TehMightyEngineer,

I just checked out your link. That was what I was looking for! I needed some justification for designing my beams for 125% of the rated capacity. I knew I had seen it somewhere on OSHA site, but that has been a while. I started working for a different company, and I have to justify it again. I am printing a copy now for all to see.

RE: Rigging Beam

ASME NUM-1-2009 is titled "Rules for Construction of Cranes, Monorails, and Hoists (With Bridge or Trolley or Hoist of the Underslung Type). I have a few pages of the 2000 edition that has the local flange bending due to wheel loads example. I believe this replaces the old CMAA 74 document. I suppose this is the "above the hook" document.

RE: Rigging Beam

Good to know steele, I'll have to see about getting that in our office as we do a lot of lifting beam and monorail designs.

Maine EIT, Civil/Structural.

RE: Rigging Beam

Some states have different testing requirements, Michigan comes to mind

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