CRANE BOOM STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS
SITUATION PROBLEM
Damage to structural members of an offshore pedestal crane Client required a structural analysis to assess physical damage to
boom was identified during an inspection. the crane boom members identified, and determine whether the
Safe Working Load (SWL) of the crane needed to be de-rated.
SOLUTION BENEFITS
Pressure Dynamics created a 3-dimensional model of the boom It was found that although the physical damage to the crane boom
with reference to reference drawings and engineering members increases the maximum utilisation of the boom, it was
documentation. still within the allowable limits of AISC requirement. Pressure
Dynamics further recommended monitoring, maintenance and
Design loads were determined according to API 2C 7th Edition, operational management actions, supporting scheduled and cost-
and with reference to sea conditions and combined input factors. effective maintenance planning.
SpaceGass analysis results were checked against AISC ASD for The client achieved confidence in ongoing lift operations and
structural utilization, and also against AS4100. confirmed operational compliance for the asset and facility.
Overview
Pressure Dynamics was engaged by the client to conduct an analysis of the structural effects
of damage identified during a prior inspection on the offshore pedestal crane, to determine
whether the Safe Working Load (SWL) specified in its load chart needed to be de-rated.
Approach
Prior to the structural modelling and analysis, a crane inspection and Hardness tests and
dimension inspection for the steel sections was conducted on site to obtain Rockwell B number
(HRB). The HRB numbers were converted to the steel tensile strength.
Onsite Average Onsite Tensile Equivalent Steel Section
Dimension Hardness Test Strength Selected for the
Measurement Rockwell B Conversion SpaceGass Modelling
Results (HRB) (MPa)
Boom Foot Section
Chords SHS 126 x 7.3 70.9 431 SHS 125 x 6 (Grade 350)
Lattices SHS 49.5 x 4.6 67.2 416 SHS 50 x 4 (Grade 350)
SHS 50 x 4.5
SHS 50 x 4.6
Boom Mid-Section 1 (next to foot section)
Chords SHS 126 x 7.5 85.7 554 SHS 125 x 6 (Grade 450)
Lattices SHS 49.5 x 4.5 71.3 436 SHS 50 x 4 (Grade 350)
SHS 49.5 x 4.6
SHS 50.5 x 4.4
Boom Mid-Section 2 (next to tip section)
Chords SHS 128.5 x 85.4 554 SHS 125 x 6 (Grade 450)
7.4
Lattices SHS 50 x 4.7 74.4 457 SHS 50 x 4 (Grade 350)
SHS 51 x 4.5
SHS 52 x 4.5
Boom Tip-Section
Chords SHS 128.5 x 89.3 585 SHS 125 x 6 (Grade 450)
7.4
Lattices SHS 52 x 4.5 68.1 420 SHS 50 x 4 (Grade 350)
SHS 52 x 5.2
SHS 52 x 4.4
SHS 52 x 4.7
Boom Chords and Lattices Steel Sections
A 3-dimensional model of the boom structure was created was modelled according to the
geometry and properties detailed on the reference drawings and engineering
documentation.
The models were created in SpaceGass by positioning spatial nodes representing structural
intersections and connecting them with beam elements representing the actual section sizes
and properties of the members used. In this instance the boom foot nodes were restrained in
x, y planes for rotation thus acting as a pivot point. The nodes at top of the boom hoist rope
are restrained in the same manner as the boom foot pins. The boom tip pin elements at the
cathead were represented by adding extra members to support the sheave shafts.
Design loads were determined according to API 2C 7th Edition: 2012 “General Method”.
Loading tables were set up to calculate the design loads to be applied to the structural
models.
The vertical dynamic coefficient factor Cv (2.4 from the crane load chart) to take account of
the following:
• Crane vertical spring rate
• Supply vessel motion
• Maximum actual hoisting speed of the crane
The vertical and horizontal design load components were applied to nodes representing
sheave locations at the boom head on the SpaceGass model. Sidelead and offlead were
applied to the model to simulate the crane motion, the supply boat motion and the wind
conditions.
The self-weight of the boom was included by applying a gravity load to the structure. Wind
loading was included using a wind speed of 40mph (17.88m/s) throughout as stated in the
crane load chart. The loads were applied to the structural model and the analysis was run for
the 4-fall configuration for the following conditions:
• Offboard lifts at 3.0m SWH
Below are some of modelling snapshots.
Crane Boom at Minimum
Radius (79o Boom Angle)
Crane Boom at Mid Radius
(54o Boom Angle)
Typical global
deflection of the
boom in the model
The boom deflects to
one side and down
due to side loading
from the wind load,
crane sidelead due to
supply boat
movement and
vertical loading from
the main load.
The defects identified in the crane inspection were reviewed - the analysis process was
completed by taking a worse case in which all the damaged members were removed in the
design analysis.
Three bent lattices at the crane boom tip
section removed from SpaceGass model
(red lines).
Corroded lattice removed from the boom
section near the boom tip to mid-section
connection (red line).
This modelling presumes that apart from the damage specifically identified in the inspection
report, the structural and mechanical components are in their as-built state, corresponding
to the drawings supplied by the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM).
Relevant sea conditions are defined as:
Offboard lifts at 3.0m SWH with Dynamic Factor (Cv) of 2.4 for 4 parts of line crane
configuration from which the respective safe working load is determined to specify API 2C
design loads. The design loads were then applied to each SpaceGass Model as follows:
• vertical design load
• sidelead and offlead loads
• self-weight (gravity)
• wind load due to crane boom and the load
Combined factors modelled and assessed included:
• Dynamic loadings – factored from the Safe Working Load
• Wind load at 40mph (17.88m/s)
• Self-weight
All structural members in the SpaceGass model were checked against AISC ASD in the
SpaceGass analysis for structural utilisation. The model was simulated for all crane radius
position and results were checked. The model was also checked and found satisfactory
accordance to Australian Standard AS4100. (The AS4100 result is less conservative than AISC
ASD requirement based on the member stress results.)
Results/Benefits
It was found that although the physical damage to the crane boom members increases the
maximum utilisation of the boom, this is still within the allowable limits of AISC requirement.
• The maximum utilisation of member is 0.9 on the boom head section at minimum
radius.
• The maximum Von Mises stresses range of the plate work is 40-55MPa at the
boom foot section platework which is well below typical plate yield strength.
• The structural members surround the affected members are mostly under 0.5
utilisation.
The structural members are acceptable given that the model was ‘damaged’ (affected
members removed from the model) to a larger extent than the structure was, therefore, no
de-rating is required.
Pressure Dynamics further recommended monitoring, maintenance and operational
management actions, which included:
• monitoring the bent lattices to ensure no further permanent deformation in the
future.
• cleaning, blasting remove corrosion the corroded lattice section and carry out
further visual and NDT inspection on the corroded lattice to ensure no water
entering the lattice and damage the boom chord. Recoat the lattice as required if
confirmed no holes and no water entering the lattice due to corrosion.
• the design and installing a more robust hook block protection bumpers to
protect the boom lattices from the hook block.
Conclusion
This case study demonstrates Pressure Dynamics proficiency for conducting structural
modelling and analysis in compliance with API 2C 7th Edition: 2012 and AISC ASD.
