P w . l . f I

1 . ~ 0 ~ 625110 ENGINEERING DATA TRANSMITTAL

2. To: (Receiving Organization) Distribution

3. Fran: (Originating Organization) 4. Related ED7 NO.:

Ooeration Eauioment N/A . . I Engineering I 5. Proj./Prog./Oept./Div.: I 6 . Design Authority/ Design Agent/Cog. I 7. Purchase Drdar NO. :

TWRS Interim Stabilization Engineering

Engr.: H. H. Ziada

12. Major Asam. Dug. No.: I 11. Receiver Remarks: 11A. Design Baseline Docunent? [ X ] Yes [ ] No

8. Originator Remarks:

HNF-3286, Rev. 0 This EDT Transmits the Release o f the Supporting Document

13. Permit/Permit Application No.:

9. Eguip./Conponent NO.:

10. SystdB(dg./FasiLity:

15. DATA TRANSMITTED

IEl M a or Dascdption 01 Data IAl IC1 ID)

Sheet Re". ltam IS1 DocumsntiDrawing No. Transmmsd NO. No. NO.

1 HNF-3286 0 Design Analysis o f 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

(F) (0) ( H I ( I )

D..ip- tor nator .r Approval Reason O+# Recab-

nator Tnni- DIspo- Dispo- mittai .nbn dum

SQ 2

leea WHC-CM-3-6. Sso.12.71

Sionotura of EOT

2. Release 5 . Poat-Review 2. Appmvad wlmmmmt 6. Reviewed wlsomrnsnt 3. information 6. Diit. IRecdpt AEknow. Requiredl 3. Dhppravad w/Eommml 6, Rscolpt afknowledged

Originator I for Receiving Orgmlzatlon I . . Cognizant Manager

S HNF-3286, Rev. 0

Design Analysis of 2,000 Lb. Jib Crane for Chemical Lab

H. H. Ziada Numatec Hanford Corporat ion, 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 To ta l Pages: 20

Key Words: J i b Crane, Chemical Lab, 200 East, Design Analys is , H o i s t i n g and Rigging, Tank Farms.

Abs t rac t : Th i s des ign ana lys i s prov ides a des ign (Mater ia ls , s izes , 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 rep lace an e x i s t i n g 1,0001b. J i b Crane.

TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER. Reference here in t o any spec i f i c c m r c i a l prcduct, process, o r serv ice by t rade name, trademark, manufacturer, o r otherwise, does not necessar i ly 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 cont ractors o r subcontractors.

P r in ted i n the United States of America. Control Services, P.O. Box 950, Mailstop H6-OB, Richland UA 99352, Phone (509) 372-2420; Fax (509) 376-4989.

lo obta in copies of t h i s docunent, contact: D o c M m t

I , 10:

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.

Data used in calculations explicitly stated in document.

Data checked for consistency with original source information as applicable.

Mathematical derivations checked including dimensional consistency of results.

Models appropriate and used within range of validity or use outside range of established validity justified .

w [ I [ I

fA [ I [ I

w [ I [ I

pa 1 1 [ I

p4 [ I [ I Hand calculations checked for errors.

Code run streams correct and consistent with analysis documentation.

Code output consistent with input and with results reported in analysis documentation.

Acceptability limits on analytical results applicable and supported.

1 1 [ I DQ

1 1 [ I pa

ga 1 1 [ I Limits checked against sources.

w Safety margins consistent with good engineering practices.

Conclusions consistent with analytical results and applicable 1 imi ts.

Results and conclusions address all points required in the problem statement.

JKl [ I [ I

pl [ I [ I

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

2.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

3.0 CONFIGURATION AND MATERIAL

4.0 LOADING AND CRITERIA

4.1 LOADING

4.2 ALLOWABLE STRESSES AND LOADS

5.0 ANALYSIS

5.1 JIB CRANE BOOM

5.2 HINGE BRACKETS

5.3 HINGE PIN

5.4 WELDS

5.5 ANALYSIS RESULTS

6.0 REFERENCES

1

1

2

2

2

2

4

4

5

7

9

11

12

Numatec Hanford Corp. Doc No. N F a EVALUATION ANALYSIS R.v*ion: 4-

Id auk-. W O N o b N o . ~ O -:- L.b

LoamlK ev:

DESIGN ANALYSIS OF 2,000 IM JIB CRANE FOR CHEMICAL LAB

I .O INTRODUCTION AND 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 prellminaty studies 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 materials are recommended to be carbon steel A36 (ASTM 1097) and the pin material to be A325 steel.

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

3- The assembly of the L-shaped I-beams and hinge connections shall 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 proposed jib 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 EVALUATION ANALYSIS R.vwon: 9-

-- 3.0 CONFIGURATION AND 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 Illlet weld. 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 38,000 Ibflinz. and the mlnlmum ultimate tensile strength is 58,000 Ibflln2. The yield and ultimate strengths of the A325 material are 92,000 lbfllnZ and 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~nt nrith 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 Ibf Ft :=-

5 Ft =11600*-

Ibf Fu :I SSOC0.- 2 in

in2 Allowable bending stress @nslle end compredw, see nekl page)

Allowable shear stress Ibf Fv = 6693 *- in

FV := 0.577.R 2

Ibf Fp = 174OO.- in2

Allowable beating stress

L

Numatec Hanford Cop. Doc No. JiNF-3208 EVALUATION ANALYSIS Revidom 9-

PageNo. 3 d / b cli.nt: -. WON& No. -M.WGO S u b j a c t : p h l Lab ' Z A

laeuiML00 M0-m. s:* :- L-M: .mildim mm w ~ r a HM. w . r h ~ Ravh.d: By:

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 is calculated in accordance with the following formulas of AlSC (1 989).

b f =&in Flange width

76.b f L =-

value (defined below), the allowable compressive bending stress for the W 12x40 I-beam

Yield strength Ibf Fy =36WO- in

(where Fy is 36 kips)

2

Lc = 76x8/6 = 101.33 in " & L :=240.in

'T :=2.14.in

_ - -112 'T For flexural members with compact or noncompact sections, 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.

C b : = l

Beam length, greater than L, of 101.33-h.

Radius of gyration of compression flange plus 1/3 of compression web, from I-beam properties tables in AlSC (1 989).

For cantilever beams; coefficient depends on end moments ratio.

51oooo'cb ;(53.23< 112.15< 119.02).

FY The beam satisfies the following condition,

'T When L (24041.) exceeds L, (107.33-in.) and I/rT (1 12.15) is between the above values. the allowable compressive bending stress is determined as the larger value from the following two equations.

Ibf a := lS3LXCOCOO- in2

Dummy units for a constant given in the following equation.

For any value of Ur,:

1 C1 :=2.9.,

Ibf c 2 := 12lxmxQ.-

CI=d/Af, ratio of depth to flange area (AISC 1989).

Dummy units for a constant given in the following equation. In

in2

C2.c b FbcZ :=- - - - - - ( 2 ) lbf

L.C1 Fh.=17241*- 2 Second compressive bending stress allowable in 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 EVALUATlON ANALYSIS R.vi.lon:

PageNo. 4 d / 6 WON& No. JilWGO L ; c , cilant: -.

Suy.ct: IW Jib C n n s i l Lab

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).

733. c z * g e

Fvw :=Fv

t :=0.25.in

Allowable shear stress for weld Ibf Fvw = 6693 a- in2

Allowable shear stress (per linear inch) for 1/4-in. Ibf F, :=0.707.t w.Fvw F = 1 I83 -- in fillet weld.

4.2.3 Allowable Stresses for Pin (A325 Material)

lbf fup := 1 2 ~ . - in2

Ultimate strength of pin material

Allowable bending stress for pin lbf Ftp = 24000 e- 2

Ibf F v ~ :=0.577.Ftp F~p=13848*- 2 in

Ftp :=- fuP 5 in

Allowable shear stress for pin

5.0 ANALYSIS

The analysis was 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 3 Ibfhn for 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

w.L2 M :=P.L+- 2

S := 5 1 .Sin3

M Ob :=- S

in

M =576oOo*in~lbf Moment at bed end

Modulus of section

Bending stress is less than bending stress allowable of 11,600 Ibf/in2.

4

Numatec Hanford Corp. Da No. HtiF-3288 EVALUATION ANALYSIS R d J o n : e

PapNo. ~!LL&&-

5.2 HINGE BRACKETS

The results of a preliminary analysis indicated that 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 recommended to 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 sufficient distances 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 presented in 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 .&in. 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

M F :=_ L 1

F = 9600 -1bf

F f t :=-

A Pt

Side length for tension stress

Tension area

Distance between brackets

Force on bracket

Tensile stress is less than 11,600 Ibfln2 allowable stress. lbf f t =4800*- in 2

5

Numatec Hanford Corp. Doc No. MF-3288 EVALUATION ANALYSIS RevMn: e

-No. 3sL& ui: -. WOlJob No. JlW'GD Subject Jib CRm &.W&&,d Lab

Lmtiom R . v k d :

5.2.2 Double Shear Failure

m.

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

Ibf f =4800.- in2

5.2.3 Bearing Failure

D := I.0.h

Apb :=D.t

F f '=- A Pb

P '

fp=9600-- Ibf

in*

Shear area

Shear stress is less than allowable shear stress of 6,693 Ibfln2.

Pin diameter

Bearing area

Bearing stress k less than 17,400 Ibfhn2 allowable bearing stress.

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 (I 991) 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

Ld ~ 0 . 8 . D L d = l . k Beam length

s =-

Height or distance to edge

2 t.e 1

6 s=o*in 3 Modulus of section

F,L d MI =-

8 M1 =960.in.lbf Bending moment

6

Nurnatec Hanford Corp. Doc No. J3NF-3286

EVALUATION ANALYSIS uwirlon: 9- P.WNO. 7 o( /6

WON& No. W O O C I h t -. blEdwb Mcx33.

Sub+%- L.b

Rniud:

Bending stress is less than allowable stress of 1 1,600 Ibfln2. Ibf f = 5760.- 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 (Pd may be expressed as a function of the allowable stress

2

Bearing area

Shear bearing factor based on t/D4 .O, and e/D=l.5 (see curve) .

Allowable tensile stress

2 A pb = 1 .in

K bv := 1.4

lbf Ft=11600-- in2

Pta:=Kb,,,.ApEFt

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

5.2.5 Dishing 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 machine the bracket hole because it is welded to the wall structure. Therefore, the pin diameter is restricted to 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). Preliminary calculations Indicated that 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.

F 2.A

fsp :=-

A p - i .in2 Pin area

Double shear stress is not conservative. because the load is not uniform. Ibf f =6112*- 2 in sp

7

Numatec Hanford COT. Doc No. mF-3286 EVALUATION ANALYSIS R d d o m 9-

Page NO. &CLI% crtmt: -. WOlJob No. NlWGO

H Mom.

Subjct: m i a n I

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.

Ibf f spd = I2223 .- in*

Single shear stress k less than 13,848 Ibfhn2 allowable shear stress.

5.3.2 Bending stress

In general static tests of single bolt frttings will not show a failure due to bolt bending failure. Beddes, il k 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

b =5.37S.in

L =s.s.in

Distance from close support (Clearance)

Dktance from far support

Length of pin between supports (inside of the bracket) P b R :F.-

LP R =9382*Ibf Reaction force

M ,=R.a P ' Mp=1173*in.lbf Maximum bending moment at point of load

32.Mp fbp:=-

II. D3

Bending stress k less than the allowable bending stress of 24,000 Ibfhnz. fbp-11945'- Ibf

\\ in2

I L S (c le . traMte)

6 t-ac ket

8

Numatec Hanford Corp. Doc No. MF-3286

EVALUATION ANALYSIS urvh(on: p- -No. JULLA

Clknt. -. WolJDb No. M H G D S u w ICI J ib I Lab m e : i w i m ~ y :

Location: avlldirn Mom LakJWE Area Hanfofd. Washinaton By:

5.4WELDS

This section evaluates the 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)

F fhw :=- A,

Ibf in

f hw -422.- Shear stress (per linear length) for tension load

The shear load 01) on the weld is the 2,000 Ibf plus the beam weight (see Section 5.1).

V : = P + w L

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

V f,:=- A,

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

Ibf f , = 440 --

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 connected together 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 plates with 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.

Total weld area

Polar moment of inerb'a

2 A,, 1~24.32.h

J \v = 945.6.i~~

9

Numatec Hanford Cow. Dos No. MF-32LIB

EVALUATION ANALYSIS Rwlsion: e Paw No. 10 of /A

WOlJob No. NlWGD h .LA Client: -.

Subjct: -.2.m0 IW Jib C w d a G t t l Lab l#lwu50 -733. cs:m* :z*%-

Loation: -Rw!J!J Mo-733 inaton R e v I s d w: c ,=9.o.in Vertical distance from point "a" to neutral axis

c :=3.33.in

Y ' Horizontal distance from point "a" to neutral axis

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

J W

Horizontal torsional shear stress lbf f & =5482*- in*

M.C f, :=-

J W

Ibf f , = 2028 *- in 2

V f v l :=- A w l

Ibf fvl -115'- in2

Vertical torsional shear stress

Vertical shear stress

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

Shear stress on weld is less than the 6,693 Ibflin' allowable shear stress. Ibf f ~ = 5886.- in 2

5.4.3 Welds 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 1 OS-in. long (see sketch below).

V h : = - M d V

Weld horizontal length

Weld vertical length (cosetvative)

Shear force in weld (V,=VJ

Fillet weld size

Ibf Shear stress in weld is less than 6,693 Ibf/in2 allowable shear stress. f h b x = 591 2 '- in2

10

Numatec Hanford Cow. Ibs No. M F J Z O EVALUATION ANALYSIS R* J-

-No. d E W d 7AeL CIW -. WWkb No. M Q D

InBuMhu Morn. Ch227- &Lu!&$.- ~~:~ tab

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 3Un . 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 IB in . madmum clearance between the hinge and the inside space of the support plates (5.37541. distance).

t ,,q :=0.375.in

A,,Q : : 2 . t a L e 0 . 7 0 7

A w 2 = 2 . h 2

fhw2:=- F

Aw2 lbf f = 4023 .- in2

fvw2':- V

Aw2 Ibf f vw2 = 1 173 -- in 2

._ J 7 2

in2

fw2 .- hw2 +fvw2

lbf fw2=4191--

Weld size Lw2 :=4.5.in Length of vertical weld8 only (conwnrathm, because ii neglects the effect of the horizontal plate). see sketch on previous page.

Area of weld

Shear stress for tension load

Shear stress for shear load

Shear stress kr less than 6.693 Ibf/ln2 allowable shear stress.

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 surface of 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 recommendations are 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 performed to verify the changes.

11

Numatec Hanford Corp. Doc No. NF-3286 EVALUATION ANALYSIS 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," Fi ih 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-

Pap.No. 13 d / L WON& No. -&WGD

ma: m ; ~ ~ ~ ~ zr-7 I+ .-LA CI*nt -. suyrt: P

Loation: Hanford. Washinaton R& Bv: Chclud:

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

- I 0 4 I f

$ --I=

I . I

S E E F I G U R E S 2-.q_ .. ,.. _ _

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

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

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

13

Nurnatec Hanford Corp. D x No, HNF-3286 EVALUATION ANALYSIS Re4rion: -0.-

-No. 14 of /L WWJob No. Jjj WGD

- Client Manin Hanfod. Gorp. Subjw. Dssion Anabis d 2.033 Ibl Jib Cnne in Chemical Lab

in Bulldim MO-733. Date: loll I BV: H. H . Z W ~ ffw- H.LL

By: L. J. J u M e Chakea? Location: -E A rea Hanford. Washindon R e v i d w

Figure 2: Modified Bracket Configuration.

. .

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

~~ - 1 - 1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -1 . - .... . ..2, . - - I

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ . .:i

i . . . . . . . . . . - _ .. . .-..I

.......... :I :.: I:::, I

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

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . ~ . . ;

. ..... . (EX jST5) i_ :.-.>. ~. . . . . ~ . > . .

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

. . . . ~ . ~ .

. . . . .

.. . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . : - . ' 1 .- -\"

14

Numatec Hanford Cop. Doc NO. HNF-32e4

EVALLJATlON ANALYSIS R.*irion:

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

1, x

I Y Y

Numatec Hanford Corp. EVALUATION ANALYSIS

Doc No. HNF-3288 R d m :

Figure 4: Configuration of Hinge and Box.

3 v '8

. . . . . . . . -. . - . . . . ,_ . . . . . 3 /y .I_

- -- 4. W 12%40

..... . . . . . . .

- - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i . . .

. . . . . . . , . , . . . _ . . . . . . . 12 ~ . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . .

16

DISTRIBUTION SHEET

To Page 1 of 1 Distribution Project TitleMlork Order Date August 25, 1999

IDesign Analysis of 2,000 lb. Crane for Chemical Laboratory EDT No. 625110

1 ECN NO. N/A

With Text All EDT/ECN Attach” Text Only Appendix

Name MSlN Only Attach. Onlv

Lockheed Martin Hanford Corporation

J. J. Elsen 57-24 X I 0. M. Jaka 57-24 X

L . J. Julyk R1-56 X

IM. R. Koch I 57-54 I x I I I C. W. Peoples 57-20 X

5. €I. Rifaey 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

I

A-6000-1 35 (10/97)