Anda di halaman 1dari 88

Manual

Office Mammoet Sap Nr.

Mammoet Europe B.V Doc. Nr.


Karel Doormanweg 47, Haven 580 Status Issued for Training and Development
3115 JD Schiedam
P.O. Box 570
3100 AN Schiedam
The Netherlands

Phone +31 (0)10 2042 424


Fax +31 (0)10 2042 442
Website www.mammoet.com

Client Mammoet Employees


Project Training & Development Programme
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing

Trailer Stability & Lashing

TP 06 EN – Rev03

© Mammoet Holding B.V., 2004.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in
any form or by any means, electronically, mechanically, by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written
permission from Mammoet Holding B.V.

3 Revised for comments February 23rd, 2006 MvR RS


st
2 Issued for Training & Development April 1 2005
Rev. Description Date Ref. Checked

Condition
Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 2 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

Table of Contents

1 Mammoet Training & Development Programme 4


1.1 Foreword 4
1.2 Safety is a recurring theme in this course. 4
1.3 Goal Training & Development Programme 5
1.4 Benefits 5
1.5 Legislation 5
1.6 Scope 5
1.7 QSE Requirements 6
1.8 Share knowledge 7
1.9 Target group 7
1.10 Symbols used in this manual 7
1.11 Subject specific terms and abbreviations 8

2 Trailer stability 9
2.1 Mechanical stability 10
2.2 Structural stability 10
2.3 Dynamic stability 10

3 Mechanical Stability 11
3.1 Mechanical stability principles 12
3.2 Determination of the tipping lines 18
3.3 Hydraulic Platform Trailer 23
3.4 Influence of the hydraulic setup 25
3.5 Using turn tables 31
3.6 Determining the system Center of Gravity 34
3.7 Mechanical stability by numbers 36
3.8 Disabling axles 39
3.9 Fixed fields 40
3.10 Calculating Mechanical stability 41
3.11 Summary 45

4 Structural Stability 46
4.1 General principle 46
4.2 Structural stability by numbers 48
4.3 Influences on the Structural stability 49
4.4 Calculation of the Axle loads 50

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 3 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

4.5 Calculation of the Structural stability 53


4.6 Summary 56

5 Dynamic influences 57
5.1 Wind pressure 62
5.2 Wind pressure calculation. Error! Bookmark not defined.
5.3 Centrifugal force 58
5.4 Calculation of the centrifugal force 59
5.5 Acceleration / Deceleration forces 60
5.6 Calculation of the centrifugal force 60
5.7 Summary 62

6 Lashing & Blocking 65


6.1 Transport forces 66
6.2 Acceleration forces 66
6.3 Centrifugal forces 68
6.4 Driving on slopes Error! Bookmark not defined.
6.5 Lashing under angles 71
6.6 Lashing of cargo on saddles 74
6.7 Lashing of cargo on turn tables 75
6.8 Single file SPMT’s 77
6.9 Summary 78

7 Conclusion 79

8 Calculation examples 80
8.1 Three-point suspension 81
8.2 Four-point suspension 84
8.3 Stability on strength 85
8.4 Dynamic axle loads 86

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 4 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

1 Mammoet Training & Development Programme

1.1 Foreword

Mammoet is a company, which obliges itself to have all its employees properly trained for the duties they will
be carrying out.
Each employee is therefore obliged to follow the training, which is offered by his employer and corresponds
with his job description.

This book on "Trailer Stability & Lashing" provides the most important facets for operators in the horizontal
transportation profession who would like to develop their skills towards operating trailers. Safe transportation
is a profession, and each day there are new things to be learned for those who want to progress in this field.

1.2 Safety is a recurring theme in this course.

The Mammoet Training & Development Programme has been created from the recognition of the
requirement for all employees who operate and repair plant and machinery to be competent in their chosen
trade disciplines.

As market leaders in our industry of Hoisting and Transporting we aim to set standards that will improve
safety and revitalize Health and Safety agenda by the adopting of a “Full Compliance Culture”.

Too many people within our industry are injured or suffer from health problems. The unacceptable high
levels of injuries and suffering can be reduced by simple precautions, such precautions are built into this
Training & Development Programme and if we all work together to achieve the targets that have been set
we can make our industry a healthier and safer place to work in.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 5 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

1.3 Goal Training & Development Programme

This manual explains most important issues regarding the requirements of operating a trailer. While regional
responsibilities may deviate between different countries, Mammoet aims to raise health, safety,
environmental and quality standards on a worldwide basis by giving recognized levels of training and
competence for all employees worldwide. This all is resulting in a certification and qualification system that
will be accepted and recognized at all Mammoet offices and projects on a worldwide basis.

1.4 Benefits

The Training & Development Programme, used and followed correctly, will provide employees with
recognized skills, competence and qualifications. This will lead to improved health and safety awareness,
better employment promotion prospects, more flexibility within the workforce and a much higher qualified
workforce because the training standards leads the industry. This all will help improve customer satisfaction
and the industry’s image.
1.5 Legislation

It is appreciated that some Mammoet employees work in many countries and therefore encounter different
legislation. Throughout this course delegates will be taught the "Mammoet Standard" which will in most
cases satisfy all countries. However, upon commencement of any operations in a new country advise
should be sought to ensure full compliance with local requirements.
All members of the workforce must be made aware of any local legislation requirements which impacts on
their work operations and ensure compliance. The certificates granted after completing the complete Trailer
Stability & Lashing course is not a replacement for local required requirements!

1.6 Scope

The Training and development programme will provide certification for plant and machinery operators on a
worldwide basis, participation in the scheme will be mandatory for all employees who require various
training and competence in the trade as known in our industry.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 6 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

1.7 QSE Requirements

All participants within the scheme will be required to have completed the Mammoet Induction test prior to
commencement. Quality, Safety and Environment is fundamental within our work disciplines and of
paramount importance to the integral part of business performance and shall receive foremost priority. At all
levels we must be committed to achieving a high level of Health, Safety, Welfare and Environmental
performance by means of compliance with all Legal Acts, Regulations, Codes of Practice, Enforcing
Authorities Guidance Notes, Industry Best Practice Standards, Corporate, Client, Regional, Local and
Provincial QSE requirements and of continual cost-effective improvement of risk awareness from our
undertakings and of the importation of risk from others.

Throughout the training you will continuously be required to undertake tests related to safety matters, which
are both general to everyday safety and specific to the discipline that you have elected to follow. Test will
take the form of one or all of the following,
a) Multiple choice question papers.
b) Written question papers.
c) Verbal questions.

During the induction you are issued a Mammoet Safety Guide which gives general information on safety
matters within all our trade disciplines, also contained within the guide are the Mammoet Safety Rules which
apply at all times, regardless of whether you are working on Mammoet premises or on a clients site. It is a
requirement of your employment to ensure that you familiarize yourself with these rules.

Safety is a culture that is very much influenced by attitude and behavior, each individual should be aware
that they are their own “Safety Officer” with the responsibility for their actions whilst at work, equally, each
individual must “Look Out” for others and ensure that nothing they do will have a detrimental effect on issues
of which they have no control.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 7 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

1.8 Share knowledge

This manual is made by and for Mammoet employees. Each Mammoet employee has the responsibility to
share his or her knowledge. The information in this manual is subject to change, therefore the latest version
can be found on our corporate intranet website and always succeeds any previous release. If you that feel
any of this information you about to read is incomplete, incorrect or even misleading, please contact the
T&DP coordinators in The Netherlands at the following e-mail address:

T&DP@mammoet.com

Your co-operation is highly appreciated.

1.9 Target group

This course is meant for personnel with or without experience with operating trailers, who want to qualify as
certified Mammoet trailer operator and possibly move up to other functions in the branch of horizontal and
vertical moving.

Employee must be in possession of following Mammoet T&DP certificate before commencing this course:
1. Mammoet Induction course
2. Rigging Course

1.10 Symbols used in this manual

CAUTION
CAUTION IS USED WHEN PERFORMING AN OPERATION THAT MAY BE CRITICAL TO SAFETY AND MAY
REQUIRE AGREED DEVIATION FROM THE GIVEN PLANS.
CAUTION

NOTE
NOTE IS USED FOR MARKING AN IMPORTANT OPERATION AS WELL AS FOR ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 8 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

1.11 Subject specific terms and abbreviations

• SWL: Safe working load:


The load at point of failure or tipping reduced with a safety factor.

• CoG: Center of gravity


The application point of the weight of an object.

• g: Gravitational acc.
9.81m/s². We use 10m/s²

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 9 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

2 Trailer stability

The intention of this course is to explain the trainee the concepts of stability, so he can identify stability
critical issues. This manual contains many formulas and calculations, which can aid the trainee into
understanding the stability concept. It is not the intention that the trainee learns these formulas or
calculations by head, they merely support the provided explanations.

In general we review the “stability” of a trailer as: “When will the trailer tip over or loose its cargo due to the
fact that trailer is driving on a camber or gradient”. Even though the result being similar, there are many
factors that have a direct or indirect influence on this type of “stability”.

• The height of the center of gravity of the cargo.


• The weight of the cargo.
• The offset of the center of gravity of cargo from trailer centre.
• The height of the trailer-deck.
• The track width of the trailer (combination).
• The weight of the trailer (combination).
• Type of suspension of the trailer: mechanical, pneumatic or hydraulic.
• Securing of cargo onto the transport vehicle (lashing).
• Wind pressure on the cargo and trailer.
• Acceleration/Deceleration forces from braking, speeding up.
• Driving speed.
• Road gradient
• Supporting capabilities of the road.

To make an objective verdict on the “stability” of a transport, we need to separate this global classification
into various definitions, as commonly used in the construction and engineering community.

- Mechanical stability (stability on tipping).


- Structural stability (stability on strength).
- Dynamic stability.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 10 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

2.1 Mechanical stability

In simple terms, the mechanical stability is defined as: “When will either load and/or trailer tip over”. Within
Mammoet, this term is often referred to as “Stability on Tipping”

2.2 Structural stability

The structural stability can be defined as “When will any of the transport components be overloaded and
fail”. Within Mammoet, this term is often referred to as “Stability on Strength”

2.3 Dynamic stability

The dynamic stability can be defined as “For which external factors will the transport be overloaded or tip
over”.

Both the mechanical stability and structural stability are based on the STATIC situation, and are part of the
“initial” stability and are unconcerned of any form of movement or external forces. The dynamic stability
considers the forces induced by movement such as:
• Acceleration.
• Deceleration.
• Wind.
• Driving through a corner.

As the influence of the dynamic forces on the static stabilities cannot be simply “deducted” from the static
stabilities, we in Mammoet have agreed to maintain the static stability angles and that the dynamic forces
will affect the axle loadings.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 11 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

3 Mechanical Stability

In practice we find that a transport combination will tip over as per one of the below scenarios:

A. The load tips over on the trailer deck.


B. The load and trailer tip over.
C. The load skids over the trailer deck, causing the trailer to tip
D. The load makes the trailer tip over a little, then slides of the trailer deck.

To determine the transports mechanical stability, we need to find out which of these scenarios (A, B, C or D)
will occur. To do this we need to look at the stability of each individual part of the system, and determine the
weakest link, so first we must find a way to establish the stability of an object.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 12 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

3.1 Mechanical stability principles

This chapter discusses the general terms and definitions concerning mechanical stability. Before explaining
the theory applicable to the stability of trailers, it is essential that you understand these basic concepts.

Stability: A system is Stable when it comes back to its original state after it has been submitted to an
external disturbance. In an Unstable system, a disturbance will produce an ever-increasing change from the
original state. A system is considered Neutral when, after being submitted to an external disturbance, it will
eventually come to equilibrium but does not return to its original location.

Equilibrium: In mechanics, equilibrium is a stable situation in which forces cancel one another.

To define stability we need to differentiate three system states:


• Stable
• Neutral
• Unstable

These states are explained by the following images:

Stable:

Original state Disturbed state Final state after some oscillations

Neutral

Original New rest position

Unstable

Original state Disturbed state The ball will start rolling


All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 13 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

In this context we can define mechanical stability as:

“Stability is the ability of a system to return to its original position after a disturbance.”

We can explain this definition in more detail through an example: If we take a book, or a square block, it will
have a certain volume and weight, depending on its measurements.

The total weight of the book is formed by the weight of the book jacket + weight of the pages + weight of the
1
ink. It is obvious that the center of gravity of the total weight of the book is somewhere within the
dimensions of the book. With some objects the center of gravity is easier to determine then others, in the
case of our book it is most likely in the middle, i.e. on half the length, half the width and half the height.

When we place the book facedown on the table, it will have a big supporting area, which is the part of table
where we have placed the book. The center of gravity G can be found at a distance of ½ d above the table.

Image 1

As the weight of the book presses on the table, the table pushes the book back with the same force.
The force that is pushing back is the called reaction force. Each point in the supporting surface pushes a
part of the weight of the book up so it stays in its place. The total reaction force R is concentrated in a single
point. This is the application point of the resultant of all reaction forces and is called the support point (S).
When there are no external forces working on the book, it will remain on the table.

1
In mechanics, weight is considered to be a force, caused by the gravity of the earth. Gravity is working on
every object around us. When an object consists of a combination of multiple parts, their gravity forces can
be combined. The sum of all forces is called the resultant of the combined forces. The application point of
this resultant is named the centre of gravity of the object.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 14 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

When we introduce an external force to the book by lifting the right side of the book from the table, point G
describes an arch as left side is being raised as shown in image 2.

Image 2

When we remove the external force holding the book, it will drop back onto the table. The reason that the
book drops back into its original position can be explained as follows: As soon as the right side of the book
is lifted free from the table, the support point S will move to the left side of the book S’. The weight of the
book is still working from point Z. When the book is released (by removing the external force) it is under the
influence of two equal forces: one force in point G vertically down and one force in point S’ vertically up.
These two forces result in moment working in clockwise direction, bringing the book back into its original
position. This moment is named the stability moment. We describe the state of the book in its facedown
position as “stable” as it has a “great degree of stability”. We measure the degree of stability by the angle
at which the object becomes “unstable” from its rest position.

When we place the book in an upright position on its bottom side, point G is located on a distance of ½ h
above the table. This distance is considerably larger than the distance ½ d. The point of support S finds
itself straight under G in the top of the table (Image 3). The width of the support surface of the book will be
large enough to allow the book to stand upright, without falling.

Image 3

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 15 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

When the book gets thinner, its tendency to tip over gets bigger. This will definitely be the case when we
start to push the right topside of the book. When we gently push the topside of the book, point S will directly
shift to point S’ and initially, point G will remain to the right of S’. When we release the book, it will return
back to its original position, meaning it still has stability. When we increase the force pushing on the topside
of the book and point G is positioned directly over S’, we create a condition where the book can either tip
over or return to its original position. At this point the state of the book has become Neutral. In this state
even a small force on the topside will disturb the state of the book; it will either tip over, or fall back into its
original position. Since the above-mentioned condition is reached quicker than when the book is placed face
down on the table, we can conclude that the stability of the book in an upright position is less than when it is
placed face down on the table.

When we allow the book to lean over even further, point G will be positioned left of S’ and a new moment
appears; G has reached its highest point in the described arch and will continue left and down. The book no
longer returns to its original position. Stable and unstable conditions are called balance states.

Stable Stable Critical Unstable

Intermediate summary:

From all this we can conclude that when a book is placed face down on a table and lifted onto one side,
point G describes a circular arch. As long as point G can get higher in the described arch, there is stability.
Initially, this stability is large, but will reduce as we lift the book further from the table. As soon as point G
has reached the highest point in the described arch and finds itself directly over the point of support, it is in
an unstable state. Immediately after reaching the highest position the book will tip over. The force of your
hand lifting the side of the book is an external force. The book itself remains unchanged (it cannot lift itself).

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 16 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

We have seen that the stability moment caused the book to return to its original position. A heavier book will
produce a larger stability moment. Similar and equally sized forces are present when the book is in a neutral
balance, but the book will no longer returns to its original position nor will it tip over. Apparently the weight of
the book is not the only factor that influences the magnitude of the stability moment. We will try to work out
this factor based on image 4.

Image 4

Imagine a thin steel bar placed face-down on a table, being held in point S’ and rotated so it is describing
the arch depicted in image 4. The center semicircle is the described arch of the center of gravity G during
the movement. Immediately after one side of the bar is lifted free from the table, the point of support finds
itself in S’. Line “a” is a vertical line through the support point S’.

In position “I” the distance between G and the line “a” is “X” cm. It is difficult to rotate the bar in S’.
In position “II” the distance between G and the line “a” has become smaller: “Y” cm. It is getting easier to
rotate the bar in S’. In position “III” the plate is vertical and the distance between G and line “a” has now
reduced to 0cm. As the bar is now balancing, it takes no effort to hold the bar in S’.

From this we can conclude that as the bar is reaching position III, it
is gradually getting easier to rotate the bar. When we continue the
rotation after reaching the vertical position, G will follow its
downward path and the effort required to stop the bar will
continuously increase.

This demonstrates that the distance between the forces of the


moment is an important factor. The distance between the forces of
a moment is called: “moment-arm”.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 17 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

Summary:
Weight is a force something that happens to any object. Weight is the influence of the gravity of the earth on
an object. Mass measures inertia, which means how fast it will react on speed changes.

Center of gravity is the application point of the weight of an object. When multiple objects are moving
together, their CoG’s and weights can be joined to form the “combined centre of gravity”.

Force acting on a body causes that body to accelerate, i.e. to change its velocity.

An object is more or less stable by its tendency to return to its original, undisturbed position. The initial
stability is always bigger than when the object is already moving / rotating, i.e. the tendency to return to its
original position will decrease while rotating.

We quantify the degree of stability by the stability angle. The stability angle is the angle at which the object
becomes “unstable” when rotation it from its original position. This stability angle depends only on the ratio
between the Height of CoG and the Tip Arm (a).

 Tip arm(a) 
Stability Angle = arcTan 
 Height CoG 

If the height of the Center of Gravity is high, then the stability angle will small.
When the Tip arm is large, the stability moment will be large and so is the stability angle.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 18 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

3.2 Determination of the tipping lines

The most important factor issue to determine the stability of a system is to define the tipping points (S’) or
when reviewing a three dimensional system: the tipping lines. When considering complete stability systems,
such as a trailer carrying a load it gets more complicated to determine the correct tipping lines. When an
incorrect tipping point or line is assumed, the calculation based on this assumption will not be correct.

3.2.1 The book on the table


The book on the table from the previous
chapter actually has four tipping lines. The
active tipping line will depend on where you
pick-up the book (apply an external force). B A
D
C
When lifting the book in A, the active tipping
line will be TLx1. When lifting the book in B,
the active tipping line will be TLy1. The tipping
line for lifting in C is TLx2, and for D it is TLy2

3.2.2 Mechanical and Pneumatic suspension systems


A mechanical suspension system uses coils or leaf springs to marginally vary the axle height to deal with
the unevenness of the road. The more the coil is compressed (or bend) the larger the reaction force.

With mechanical suspension the axle loads are very difficult to determine, as the axle load depends on the
amount of compression in the springs which are not equalized. This means that each axle is a support point
and for vehicles with more then 2 axles we get more than 4 support points in our support system. If we
assume that the spring compression is equal, we can group these axles by their contribution to the stability.
We can also calculate a virtual pressure point by the summation of the position and contribution of each axle
to the group.

A Pneumatic system uses compressed air to vary the axle height. The pressure of this air depends on the
loading of the axle and is regulated using a valve. Smarter systems can lift axles when its pressure falls
below a certain value. The air system can also be used to raise and lower the truck or trailer but the stroke
(height difference) is limited.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 19 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

When the axle loads are equal, the combined pressure points are easily found as displayed below. The fifth
wheel (the connection pivot between truck and trailer) on the truck provides 2 supports on its hinges.

When the axle loads are not equal you can calculate the pressure point per the following example.

The hydraulics of the first two axles is


combined with the cylinders in the
“neck” of the trailer. Please note that
to calculate the axle pressures by
hand, you need to know exactly how
the trailer distributes the loads of the
axle to the hydraulic neck. In this case
the axle and kingpin loads are
calculated using the NOVAB trailer
program provided by the Nooteboom
trailer company, resulting in the
following arrangement.

As the loads of the rear 6 axles are equal, we can combine them to find a pressure point.
The pressure point of the kingpin combined with the 2 first trailer axles is found using the following
calculation:
P = (F1 x D1 + F2 x D2 + F3 x D3 + F4 x D4) / (Ftotal)
P = (17.5 x 0 + 6 x 5.067 + 6 x 6.427 + 6 x 7.787) / (17.5 + 6 + 6 + 6)
P = 3.259m

Please note: The two points in the kingpin combined with the pressure point on the two front axles reduces
the width of the stability lines.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 20 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

CAUTION
FOR ALL ARTICULATED TRANSPORT: WHEN THE TRAILERS ORIENTATION IS ROTATED ON THE
TRACTOR THE STABILITY IS REDUCED DUE TO THE SWIVEL IN THE FIFTH WHEEL. IT IS THEREFORE
CAUTION ADVISED TO REVIEW THE FIFTH WHEEL AS A SINGLE SUPPORT POINT

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 21 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

3.2.3 Hydraulic suspension

Hydraulic or hydro-pneumatic suspension systems are used to equalize the axle loads. A hydraulic
suspension system will provide a higher grade of stability because the axle pressure is has no related to any
form of compression. Also the hydraulics allow the operator to level the trailer deck.

Below is a simplified hydraulic scheme of a 6 axle hydraulic trailer (one side only). Normally when driving,
the trailer height is not changed so
valves VA and VB are closed, this
results in closed system A and B.

When the trailer operator opens


valve VA or VB and the pump
delivers oil, the trailer will raise its
front or rear.

These closed systems are


generally referred to as a
hydraulic group or field. When
axle 1 is raised by an obstacle on
the pavement, the oil from cylinder
C1 will be pushed into cylinder
C2, pushing the axle A2 down. In
this case the displaced oil by Axle
A1 will cause an equal
displacement of Axle A2. This
displacement will result in a tilt
angle of the trailer deck.

When an obstacle in the


pavement raises axle 3, the oil
from cylinder C3 will be pushed into cylinders C4, C5 and C6 pushing down axles A4, A5 and A6. In this
case the displaced oil by Axle A3 will move Axles A4, A5 and A6 by 1/3 times the displacement of Axle A3.
Due to the self-equalizing effect of the hydraulic oil and the equal diameters of the cylinders in the system,
we know that the resulting axle load in each field will be equal, causing a resulting force in the center of this
field. In our case the center of field A is exactly between A1 and A2. The center or pressure point of field B
is located exactly between A4 and A5.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 22 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

3.2.4 Hydraulic/Pneumatic suspension

When a hydraulic suspension system is required to make fast changes in the axle heights, due to driving at
high speeds, the resistance of the fluid going through the valves in the system cause high peak pressures.
This effect is caused by the fact that load and trailer have a tendency to remain at the same height in
relation to the center of the earth (inertia). For this to happen, the distance between the trailer deck and the
pavement temporarily needs to be reduced.

In a hydro-pneumatic suspension system the compression of a gas medium is used to reduce the peak
pressures in the system caused by high dynamic forces. The most common used gas medium in most
trailers is nitrogen.

Hydraulic
Hydraulic OILoil

M Gas
GAS

When one of the axles in this hydraulic set-up is raised by a bump in the road, the displaced oil of the
cylinder connected to the axle is pushed into the accumulator, resulting in a higher pressure of the oil and
gas. If this is a continuous situation, the oil will start flowing from the axles with a higher pressure to the
axles with a lower pressure until all pressures are equalized. When the axle moves back before the
pressures are equalized, the pressure in oil and gas is already reduced so the oil will not start flowing to the
other cylinders.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 23 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

3.3 Hydraulic Platform Trailer

The suspension system of a platform trailer is a hydraulic system as described in paragraph 3.6. By
changing the hydraulic set-up of the platform trailer, you can determine and alter the tipping lines of the
system.

3.3.1 4-point suspension

A trailer in a 4-point suspension


configuration uses 4 hydraulic fields,
where the pressure in each field will be
equal for each axle in this field. The
combination of axles in these fields will
produce a combined pressure point as
indicated by the black dots. These
pressure points are the support points of
the trailer.

When we connect the support points, we will find the tipping lines indicated by the black lines.

The Tip Arm (a) is the distance from the CoG to the nearest tipping-line.

3.3.2 3-point suspension

The tipping lines of a trailer with 3-point


suspension are determined in similarly
manner as described for the 4-points
system.

The result is a triangle shown in the


image.

The Tip Arm (a) is the distance from the


CoG to the nearest tipping-line. It may be
evident that this distance is smaller for a
3-point than for a 4-point suspension.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 24 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

This defines the stability lines in the horizontal plane, but as we have seen with the book, we also need the
height distance between the tipping plane and the CoG of the object in the vertical direction.

The suspension of a hydraulic platform trailer is formed by a mechanical axle stand and rocker arm with a
hydraulic cylinder, allowing the trailer deck to be raised and lowered. On this rocker arm, a swivel allows the
axle to turn over its longitudinal axis to allow for road cambers and small level differences.

The image below shows a side view of some axles in their highest and lowest position. The centerline of the
swivel is not parallel to the road for every trailer height. To remove this variation and to simplify the
calculation input we assume the worse case: Assume the pivot points on the wheel hub centers as indicated
by the black dots in the rear-view drawing.

Pivot point

Scheuerle ’94 series Rear-view KAMAG

Axle pivot of Cometto MX trailer.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 25 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

The tipping lines we have found in this section can be used to calculate the initial stability of the trailer.
However, the swiveling motion of the wheel hub is limited by the clearance between the tire and the axle
stand, which can vary for different heights of the trailer deck. When the trailer starts tipping and the
clearance diminished, in theory the trailer will start to tip over the tire edge. In reality the tire will deform due
to the extreme and unbalanced tire loads and the actual tipping point can no longer be determined.

To reach this type of stability, we already gained some


speed in the tipping motion, making the calculation very
complex. As the trailer first needs to negotiate the initial
stability stage, it will be sufficient to calculate the stability
by using the initial tipping lines as found in this chapter.

3.4 Influence of the hydraulic setup

From the previous chapter, it was made clear that the Tip Arm (a) largely depends on the hydraulic setup of
the trailer. Before we discus the influence of the hydraulic setup on the mechanical stability of the trailer we
first need to explain some conventions as used by Mammoet and trailer manufacturers.

Choosing the most appropriate hydraulic setup depends on various circumstantial issues. This paragraph
provides some rules of thumb to make these decisions. These rules are numbered by their initial priority,
however, depending on the situation, you may need to deviate or change their priorities.

When the stability of a transport becomes more critical, the practical issues become less important. When
there are less stability issues, it is better to obey the practical rules as work may be executed in a more
standard way, making it obvious to all what the situation is.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 26 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

3.4.1 Rules of thumb and Terminology

Rule 1:
Always choose a hydraulic setup that provides sufficient stability.

Rule 2:
Try to match the number of cylinders in each field. During lifting or lowering operations, the trailer will remain
reasonably level, small corrections can be made after setting the general height. Also it makes the trailer
arrangement more responsive upon leveling a particular field. A field with a large number of cylinders
requires more oil to get the same stroke of the axles. If it is not possible to match the number of cylinders in
the fields, put the excess axles in the fields providing the sideways stability.

In general, especially for single file trailers, the sideways stability will be the smaller then the stability over
the front or rear. The fields providing the sideways stability are the fields that split the trailer left and right.
The floating field provides stability over the front or the rear. In a four point setup, all fields contribute to the
stability in all directions.

Rule 3:
Always try to make the hydraulic setup so that the point in the triangle points in or from the driving direction.
This makes negotiating ramps easier, as we do not need to compensate to keep the trailer level in the
sideways direction.

In stability critical situations, you might need to resort to the second image. In this case it becomes
mandatory to level the trailer deck for every bump in the road surface.

Preferred setup

Triangle point

Triangle base

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 27 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

Rule 4:
When considering self propelled trailers, position the base of the triangle toward the position of the power-
pack. The center of gravity of the power pack is not exactly in the middle and this setup provides a higher
degree of stability. Also the oil going to the fields providing side-ways stability has to negotiate fewer
hydraulic connections (resistance!) making the trailer more responsive.

The standard way to indicate the hydraulic setup is to mention the ratio of front : rear axle lines, where the
first number is always the split fields (left/right).

Examples:

Split fields
providing sideways
stability

Floating Field

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 28 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

3.4.2 Deciding on a 3 or 4-point system

We will try to explain why you should decide on a 3- or 4-point suspension system. Trailer manufacturers
always presume the utilization of the 3-point suspension system as a 3-point system does not allow any
diagonal load transfer induced by uneven road levels. 4-Point suspension systems can introduce internal
forces in the trailer, such as torsion when it is not properly leveled. These load transfers might overload the
fields in the system.

A 3-point suspension system with a centrally positioned load combined on a level underground result in
equal axle loadings on the trailer. On a transverse gradient of the road, the shift of the CoG causes a shift of
the load from one of the sideways split fields to the other side, while the front field pressure remains the
same as on a level road. To remove the shift in CoG, the trailer can be leveled by pumping oil in the heavy
loaded field. On a transversal slope one of the three field has to absorb all the eccentric forces, while one
field retains the same load as on a level surface. To level the trailer, more oil has to be pumped in the heavy
loaded field. The disadvantage of the three-point suspension is the reduced transverse stability arm in the
tipping triangle. This also reduces the allowable tilt angle of the trailer, i.e. the stability on tipping angle.

The 4-point suspension system provides a larger transverse stability arm and has a better degree of stability
on tipping. However, due to diagonal load transfer on an uneven road surface, the operator needs to
monitor and adjust the axle pressures continuously in order not to overload any of the fields. If this is not
properly done there is a chance either the trailer or load will be overloaded.

Rule 5:
Always start with a 3-Point system, when the stability is critical, or when a stability critical exercise needs to
be performed, always resort to a 4-point suspension. This means that we need to define “critical”. Mammoet
uses a mechanical stability limit of 7 degrees.

In practice this means:


- When a transport has a mechanical stability angle smaller 7°, switch to a 4-point system.
- In doubt, contact the engineering department to make a stability calculation.

3.4.3 Splitting hydraulic fields

In the previous paragraphs, the importance of the tip arm (a) was explained. This tip arm(a) may vary for
different setups of a single trailer. In this example the hydraulic front to back ratio is varied to find the
maximum possible tipping arm. The height of the CoG will be kept constant. The resulting table on the next
page shows why we should never reduce the number of cylinders in the fields that provide side-ways
stability.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 29 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

CAUTION
THE TABLE AND DRAWINGS BELOW ARE FOR STUDY PURPOSES ONLY AND SHOULD NOT BE
PRACTISED. THESE NUMBERS ARE PROVIDED FOR REFERENCE, THE CALCULATION IS DETAILED IN
CAUTION THE LATER PARAGRAPHS.

9:1 8:2 7:3 6:4 5:5 4:6 3:7 2:8 1:9

A (triangle length) 7000 7000 7000 7000 7000 7000 7000 7000 7000
X (point-CoG) 6300 5600 4900 4200 3500 2800 2100 1400 700
C (leg length) 7037 7037 7037 7037 7037 7037 7037 7037 7037
Tip arm (a) 649 577 505 433 361 288 216 144 72

From the above results it would appear that for mechanical stability, the best option is to split the trailer 9:1.
In a later paragraph we will se why this is not the overall best option. Though highly important, mechanical
stability is not the only criteria to decide on the hydraulic setup.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 30 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

Ro-Ro operations

When driving off or onto a barge or ship, it JETTY BARGE


is advised to orientate the stability triangle
in such a direction that the floating field
will roll onto the barge first. This ensures
that the trailer and cargo can be leveled
using the quay as a fixed base, while the barge can move under the axles of the floating field. After the
floating field has been rolled on, the barge already holds some weight and is less affected by the movement
of the water.

As a ro-ro operation is considered to be stability critical situation, it might be required to momentarily switch
to a four point suspension system. When using a four point suspension during the roll-on or roll-off, it is
mandatory to properly and constantly monitor the axle pressures.

When the transport is half way onto the barge, the trailer assists the barge to remain level due to the fact
that the “rear” of the transport has two support points on the quay that keep the barge level. When the final
axles roll onto the barge, this support is lost and the barge will assume its natural position which might be a
bigger angle then the stability angle of the trailer.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 31 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

3.5 Using turn tables

A turntable or bolster allows the trailer to rotate under the load, when this load is carried by multiple sets of
trailers (dollies). This rotation makes it easier to go through turns making the transport more flexible and
maneuverable.

Deck

Shoe - slipper

Skid-Sliding ring

Without shoes:
slipper

The turn table provides various degrees of freedom: Due the ball-joint in the center, it can rotate in all three
directions, while maintaining its position. Some bolsters have a ball-joint with a bolt-nut connection to limit
vertical movement, but usually it’s being kept in place by the weight on top. The shoes restrict the rotation to
the sides. Some bolster allow the shoes to be left out. In that case, the bolster provides only front-to-back
pivot.

A bolster with the shoes provides 3 points of support while only the two outside supports actually provide
lateral stability so the turntable is “on two points”. When the shoes are removed, there is only one support,
so it is “on one point”.

In practice we can combine these two types of supports. If we use both turntables with shoes, the
combination of load plus turntables will be “on 4 points”. When we remove the shoes from one of the
turntables then the combination will be “on 3 points”. When all shoes are removed, the combination has only
2 support points and will be unstable by definition.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 32 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

When using turntables (bolsters) you have to consider the stability of the trailers and the load with the
turntables separately and transpose their results to combine them:

Stability triangles of trailers

Stability lines of load on turntables

Combined stability lines

The black rectangle is the combined stability of the entire system. What is made clear from the above
picture is that when driving straight ahead, the combined stability is a little bit better than the stability of the
single trailer underneath the bolsters, due to the angle on the triangle. We can therefore conclude that the
stability of the combination is the same or better then the stability of the single trailer when we assume the
saddle load to be applied at the height of the CoG of the cargo. But even when the stability of the
combination is bigger than the stability of the single trailer, the actual limit when driving will be the smaller
one of the two, in this case being the tipping angle of the single trailer, as the trailer will tip over before
reaching the combined stability angle.

A specific situation would be when both trailers would be angled under the load as depicted in the image
below.

The entire transport combination would tip over the line A-A, which is at the same distance as the trailer
tipping line. As we already assumed the trailer tipping angle as the limit, this situation results in the exact
same limiting angle.

Also we need to review the influence of rotating the trailer while negotiation a turn, or when it is required for
project specific reasons to maneuver the trailers into a certain position. This is to demonstrate that the
stability of the combination is only increased when the trailer is being positioned under an angle.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 33 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

The image below shows various different types of set-ups for using bolsters. Each trailer can have a
different hydraulic suspension setup.

1 2 3
Trailer 1 = 3p Trailer 1 = 2p Trailer 1 = 3p
Trailer 2 = 3p Trailer 2 = 3p Trailer 2 = 3p
Bolster = 4p Bolster = 4p Bolster = 3p

Option 1 shows a traditional 3 point suspension on both trailers combined with a four point suspension in the
bolsters. This option ensures maximum stability, but increases the risk off load transfer as stability forces will
travel through load and bolsters.

Option 2 is only for theoretical reference should never be practiced, as the 2 point suspension will be kept
upright by the trailer on 3-points when driving straight ahead, but when driving through corners, the stability
will reduce to zero.

Option 3 may only be practiced when you can ensure that the load is able to transfer the up righting moment
required for the floating bolster. This would be the case when transporting square beams that are lashed
properly to the bolster table. Another example is a reactor on saddles, but you need to ensure that the
fixation between saddle and reactor is rigid enough to transfer the loads. The mayor advantage is that there
is no chance of load transfer.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 34 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

3.6 Determining the system Center of Gravity

As discussed in the conclusion of mechanical stability, the next important factor to find is the height of the
Center of Gravity. We already know that the tipping plane is at the height of the center of the axle hubs, so
by adding the height of the trailer above the axle hub to the height of the CoG of the cargo to the trailer
deck, we find the height of CoG for the system.

However, when doing this, we are already reviewing the stability of a combined system, i.e.: Trailer + Cargo.

As explained at the start of this chapter, if we are to determine the stability of a combined system, we need
to look carefully at which of the described scenarios will take place, or in other words, determine the stability
of each individual item when moving.

If we consider cargo placed on top of a trailer, the axles of the trailer will experience the weight of this object
plus its own weight as a single force that is lead through its wheels onto the road. This is because the
weight of the cargo is pressing down on the trailer deck and the weight of the cargo and the trailer deck
together are pressing down onto the axles. We therefore need to combine the weight of the trailer and the
weight of the cargo. Furthermore, when the system is placed on an incline and the transport is rotated, the
centers of gravity will rotate together as long as the transport remains “stable”. This in turn means we can
combine these CoG’s as long as the system is stable. This combined center of gravity will always be located
between the CoG of the cargo and the CoG of the Trailer:

The below example shows the stability triangles for a three point suspension.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 35 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

If we do the same for less wide load (narrow), and different ratios between the weight of the trailer and the
weight of the cargo, we find that when the weight of the cargo is much lighter then the trailer, the
combination has a higher degree of stability then the cargo on the trailer deck. In all other cases the stability
of the combination will the limiting factor.

Within Mammoet we have agreed to the following compromise to determine the height of the transport CoG:

- When cargo is not lashed, use the CoG of the Cargo to determine stability angle.
- When cargo is sufficient vertically lashed, use the combined CoG to determine stability angle.

Sufficient vertical lashing means: “The lashing should be strong enough to be able to lift the trailer, so cargo
plus trailer will keep acting as a single system when the stability angle of the cargo has been exceeded. In
the chapter “Lashing and Blocking” is explained how to calculate the required amount of lashing.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 36 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

3.7 Mechanical stability by numbers

Here we have calculated the stability angles for various standard trailer arrangements. This can only be
done for standard trailer configurations, as there are an unlimited amount of trailer combination possibilities.

CAUTION
THE FOLOWING TABLES ARE FOR STUDY PURPOSES ONLY AND HAVE ONLY LIMITES USE AS THE
ARE ONLY VALID FOR STANDARD HYDRAULIC SETUPS AND WHILE COG IS LOADED IN THE CENTER
CAUTION OF THE TRAILER IN ALL DIRECTIONS.

Trailer type: Single KAMAG / Scheuerle'84/'94/2004 Longitudinal spacing: 1.4 m


Transversal spacing: 1.45 m
Deck height: 1.5 m
Limit: 7 ° Tipping plane: 0.3 m
Height CoG above Trailer deck [m]
Hydraulic Tip Arm
Lines
Setup (a)
2.00 2.25 2.50 2.75 3.00 3.25 3.50 3.75 4.65 5.00

All 4 Point 0.725 12.7 11.8 11.0 10.4 9.7 9.2 8.7 8.3 7.0 6.6
6 4:2 0.476 8.4 7.8 7.3 6.8 6.4 6.1 5.7 5.4 4.6 4.3
8 6:2 0.539 9.5 8.8 8.2 7.7 7.3 6.9 6.5 6.2 5.2 4.9
8 5:3* 0.449 7.9 7.4 6.9 6.4 6.1 5.7 5.4 5.1 4.3 4.1
10 7:3 0.505 8.9 8.3 7.7 7.2 6.8 6.4 6.1 5.8 4.9 4.6
10 6:4* 0.433 7.7 7.1 6.6 6.2 5.8 5.5 5.2 4.9 4.2 3.9
12 8:4 0.482 8.5 7.9 7.4 6.9 6.5 6.1 5.8 5.5 4.7 4.4
14 10:4 0.516 9.1 8.5 7.9 7.4 7.0 6.6 6.2 5.9 5.0 4.7
14 9:5* 0.465 8.2 7.6 7.1 6.7 6.3 5.9 5.6 5.3 4.5 4.2
16 11:5 0.497 8.8 8.2 7.6 7.1 6.7 6.3 6.0 5.7 4.8 4.5
16 10:6* 0.452 8.0 7.4 6.9 6.5 6.1 5.8 5.4 5.2 4.4 4.1
18 12:6 0.483 8.5 7.9 7.4 6.9 6.5 6.1 5.8 5.5 4.7 4.4
20 14:6 0.507 8.9 8.3 7.7 7.3 6.8 6.4 6.1 5.8 4.9 4.6
20 13:7* 0.471 8.3 7.7 7.2 6.7 6.3 6.0 5.7 5.4 4.5 4.3
22 15:7 0.494 8.7 8.1 7.6 7.1 6.7 6.3 5.9 5.6 4.8 4.5
22 14:8* 0.461 8.1 7.6 7.0 6.6 6.2 5.9 5.6 5.3 4.5 4.2
24 16:8 0.483 8.5 7.9 7.4 6.9 6.5 6.1 5.8 5.5 4.7 4.4
*For study purposes only. **This table is only valid when CoG is loaded in center of trailer

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 37 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

Trailer type: Double KAMAG / Scheuerle'84/'94/2004 Longitudinal spacing: 1.4 m


Transversal spacing: 2.9 m
Deck height: 1.5 m
Limit: 7 ° Tipping plane: 0.3 m
Height CoG above Trailer deck [m]
Hydraulic Tip Arm
Lines
Setup (a)
5.50 5.75 6.00 6.25 6.50 6.75 7.00 7.25 10.50 11.00

All 4 Point 1.450 12.2 11.7 11.3 11.0 10.6 10.3 10.0 9.7 7.0 6.7
6 4:2 0.914 7.7 7.4 7.2 6.9 6.7 6.5 6.3 6.1 4.4 4.2
8 6:2 1.053 8.9 8.6 8.3 8.0 7.7 7.5 7.3 7.1 5.1 4.9
10 7:3 0.994 8.4 8.1 7.8 7.5 7.3 7.1 6.9 6.7 4.8 4.6
12 8:4 0.953 8.0 7.8 7.5 7.2 7.0 6.8 6.6 6.4 4.6 4.4
14 10:4 1.025 8.6 8.3 8.0 7.8 7.5 7.3 7.1 6.9 5.0 4.8
16 11:5 0.989 8.3 8.0 7.8 7.5 7.3 7.0 6.8 6.6 4.8 4.6
18 12:6 0.960 8.1 7.8 7.5 7.3 7.1 6.8 6.6 6.4 4.6 4.5
20 14:6 1.010 8.5 8.2 7.9 7.7 7.4 7.2 7.0 6.8 4.9 4.7
22 15:7 0.984 8.3 8.0 7.7 7.5 7.2 7.0 6.8 6.6 4.8 4.6
24 16:8 0.963 8.1 7.8 7.6 7.3 7.1 6.9 6.6 6.5 4.7 4.5
*For study purposes only. **This table is only valid when CoG is loaded in center of trailer

Trailer type: Triple KAMAG / Scheuerle'84/'94/2004 Longitudinal spacing: 1.4 m


Transversal spacing: 4.35 m
Deck height: 1.5 m
Limit: 7 ° Tipping plane: 0.3 m
Height CoG above Trailer deck [m]
Hydraulic Tip Arm
Lines
Setup (a)
8.50 9.00 9.50 10.00 10.50 11.00 11.50 12.00 16.50 17.00

All 4 Point 2.175 12.6 12.0 11.4 10.9 10.5 10.1 9.7 9.3 7.0 6.8
6 4:2 1.288 7.5 7.1 6.8 6.5 6.2 6.0 5.7 5.5 4.1 4.0
8 6:2 1.521 8.9 8.4 8.0 7.7 7.4 7.1 6.8 6.5 4.9 4.7
10 7:3 1.454 8.5 8.1 7.7 7.3 7.0 6.7 6.5 6.2 4.6 4.5
12 8:4 1.404 8.2 7.8 7.4 7.1 6.8 6.5 6.3 6.0 4.5 4.4
14 10:4 1.517 8.8 8.4 8.0 7.7 7.3 7.0 6.8 6.5 4.8 4.7
16 11:5 1.468 8.6 8.1 7.8 7.4 7.1 6.8 6.5 6.3 4.7 4.6
18 12:6 1.429 8.3 7.9 7.6 7.2 6.9 6.6 6.4 6.1 4.6 4.4
20 14:6 1.504 8.8 8.3 8.0 7.6 7.3 7.0 6.7 6.5 4.8 4.7
22 15:7 1.468 8.6 8.1 7.8 7.4 7.1 6.8 6.5 6.3 4.7 4.6
24 16:8 1.438 8.4 8.0 7.6 7.3 7.0 6.7 6.4 6.2 4.6 4.5
*For study purposes only. **This table is only valid when CoG is loaded in center of trailer

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 38 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

Trailer type: Single 3m wide Conventional Trailer Longitudinal spacing: 1.51 m


Transversal spacing: 1.8 m
Deck height: 1.2 m
Limit: 7 ° Tipping plane: 0.3 m
Height CoG above Trailer deck [m]
Hydraulic Tip Arm
Lines
Setup (a)
3.00 3.25 3.50 3.75 4.00 4.25 4.50 4.75 4.65 5.00

All 4 Point 0.900 12.9 12.2 11.5 10.9 10.4 9.9 9.4 9.0 9.2 8.6
6 4:2 0.588 8.5 8.0 7.6 7.2 6.8 6.5 6.2 5.9 6.0 5.6
8 6:2 0.668 9.7 9.1 8.6 8.1 7.7 7.3 7.0 6.7 6.8 6.4
10 7:3 0.626 9.1 8.5 8.0 7.6 7.2 6.9 6.6 6.3 6.4 6.0
12 8:4 0.597 8.7 8.1 7.7 7.3 6.9 6.6 6.3 6.0 6.1 5.7
14 10:4 0.641 9.3 8.7 8.2 7.8 7.4 7.0 6.7 6.4 6.5 6.1
16 11:5 0.617 8.9 8.4 7.9 7.5 7.1 6.8 6.5 6.2 6.3 5.9
18 12:6 0.599 8.7 8.2 7.7 7.3 6.9 6.6 6.3 6.0 6.1 5.7
20 14:6 0.629 9.1 8.6 8.1 7.7 7.3 6.9 6.6 6.3 6.4 6.0
22 15:7 0.613 8.9 8.3 7.9 7.5 7.1 6.7 6.4 6.1 6.3 5.9
24 16:8 0.599 8.7 8.2 7.7 7.3 6.9 6.6 6.3 6.0 6.1 5.7
*For study purposes only. **This table is only valid when CoG is loaded in center of trailer

Trailer type: Double 3m wide Conventional Trailer Longitudinal spacing: 1.51 m


Transversal spacing: 3.4 m
Deck height: 1.2 m
Limit: 7 ° Tipping plane: 0.3 m
Height CoG above Trailer deck [m]
Hydraulic Tip Arm
Lines
Setup (a)
7.50 7.75 8.00 8.25 8.50 8.75 9.00 9.25 12.75 13.00

All 4 Point 1.700 11.4 11.1 10.8 10.5 10.2 9.9 9.7 9.5 7.0 6.9
6 4:2 1.061 7.1 6.9 6.7 6.6 6.4 6.2 6.1 5.9 4.4 4.3
8 6:2 1.227 8.3 8.0 7.8 7.6 7.4 7.2 7.0 6.8 5.1 5.0
10 7:3 1.161 7.8 7.6 7.4 7.2 7.0 6.8 6.6 6.5 4.8 4.7
12 8:4 1.114 7.5 7.3 7.1 6.9 6.7 6.5 6.4 6.2 4.6 4.5
14 10:4 1.199 8.1 7.8 7.6 7.4 7.2 7.0 6.9 6.7 5.0 4.9
16 11:5 1.157 7.8 7.6 7.4 7.2 7.0 6.8 6.6 6.5 4.8 4.7
18 12:6 1.125 7.6 7.4 7.2 7.0 6.8 6.6 6.4 6.3 4.7 4.6
20 14:6 1.183 8.0 7.7 7.5 7.3 7.1 6.9 6.8 6.6 4.9 4.8
22 15:7 1.153 7.8 7.5 7.3 7.1 6.9 6.8 6.6 6.4 4.8 4.7
24 16:8 1.128 7.6 7.4 7.2 7.0 6.8 6.6 6.5 6.3 4.7 4.6
*For study purposes only. **This table is only valid when CoG is loaded in center of trailer

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 39 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

3.8 Disabling axles

In some cases it might be required to disable axles to reduce the bending moment in the spine beam of the
trailer, depending on the load case. When disabling axles on a three-point suspension, you need to be
aware that there is a chance that by doing this you reduce the tipping stability. On a four point suspension
you only lose stability on strength, but the mechanical stability remains intact. Depending on the resulting
hydraulic setup, the mechanical stability angle can be bigger or smaller.

3.9 Using spacers

A similar effect can be


expected when using
spacer frames. Even
though it would be practical
to split the hydraulics front-
back at the position of the
spacer, it will reduce the
mechanical stability
drastically.

Never increase mechanical stability by re-ordering the hydraulic fields when this results in large differences
in the number of axles in the fields. This will increase the risk of overloading the axles in the field(s) with
fewer axles.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 40 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

3.10 Fixed fields

A fixed field is a hydraulic field that is preset to a certain pressure. You can compare a fixed field with the
fourth field in a 4-point suspension, where the difference is that a second operator will monitor and adjust
the pressure to a constant value. Sometimes the construction of the cargo is unable to transfer loads, and
when it is impossible to physically connect the trailer, you can use a fixed field. This field will form an extra
support point for the construction.

The use of fixed fields can result in overload or loss of stability when the pressures in the fixed fields are not
properly monitored and adjusted. You should only resort to using fixed fields when the construction on the
trailer requires this, or when it is impossible to hydraulically connect the trailers.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 41 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

3.11 Calculating Mechanical stability

So far, we have learned that we measure the mechanical stability is the angle at which the transport tips
over, and know how to determine the tipping lines and level of the tipping plane of a trailer. When the center
of gravity of the cargo resides between these tipping lines, the state of the transport is “stable”. However,
when the center of gravity of the cargo finds itself above one of these tipping lines, the transport
combination becomes Neutral, but Critical. If the center of gravity resides beyond the tip-lines, the trailer will
tip-over (unstable).

When we consider a hydraulic platform trailer using a four-point suspension, the center lines of the axles
form the tipping points of the trailer, and the level of the tipping plane is at the center of the wheel hubs.

The images below show these various states. We are now able to determine the maximum gradient or road
camber for this particular transport before the trailer starts tipping over. To do this we require the dimensions
of the tip arm, CoG height of the reactor, height of the trailer, axle height and the saddles height.

Stable Neutral Unstable

Transport
CoG

Tip plane

Tip arm

The height of the center of gravity of the cargo is calculated as:

Formula 1 Height CoG = Height trailer + Height saddle + height CoG cargo - Trailer axle height.

The maximum gradient using the formula:

Tip arm(a)
Formula 2 Tan α ( o ) =
Height CoG

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 42 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

3.11.1 Example: Transport details


SPMT trailer height = 1500mm
SPMT axle spacing = 1400mm
SPMT track width = 1450mm
SPMT axle height = 300mm
SPMT CoG height = 750mm above ground level
Trailer weight = 33t (26[6Liner] + 7[PPU])

Reactor weight = 120t


Diameter reactor = 4000mm
Saddle height = 675mm

3.11.2 Example: 4 point suspension


Due to the 4-point suspension the smallest Tip arm in this example is half the track width (a=725).

So entering these values into our formulas results in:

Height CoG = 1500 + 675 + (4000/2) - 300 = 3875mm (Formula 1)

725
Tan( α ) = = 0.187 = 18.7% (Formula 2)
3875

 a = 10.6°

This means that the trailer will start to tip over at an angle of 10.6° so the trailer deck angle should be kept
below that value. If we couple additional trailers sideways, we effectively improve the Track Base so our
stability angle will increase. If we use timber blocks underneath the saddle of the reactor (100mm), we
effectively increase the height of the CoG, so the stability angle will get smaller.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 43 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

3.11.3 Example: 3-point suspension

In case of the three point suspension, we need to do so more work to find the Tip Arm due to the geometry
of the hydraulic setup.

We need to determine the dimensions of the triangle and


calculate the smallest tipping arm.

A = 3 axles = 3 x 1400 = 4200mm


B = half track = 1450 / 2 = 725mm
X = 2 axles = 2 x 1400 = 2800mm

Pythagoras: C² = A² + B²

C= ( 4200 2 + 725 2 ) = 4262mm


a = (725 * 2800) / 4266 = 476mm

The height of CoG remains unchanged (3875) so we can complete the formula:

476
Tan( α ) = = 0.123 = 12.3% (Formula 2)
3875

 a = 7.0°

This means that the trailer will start to tip over at an angle of
7.0° so the trailer deck angle should be kept below that value.

In case of a three point suspension you can improve the Tip


Arm (a) by changing to a different hydraulic setup, though the
improvement will not be that large.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 44 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

3.11.4 Example: 3 point suspension with combined CoG

By combining the center of gravity of cargo and trailer, the height of the center of gravity used in the formula
is reduced, as the trailer center of gravity will always below the load. Lowering the height of the CoG is
always more favorable for stability on tipping, but is often not possible, due to the shape of the cargo. The
required friction to prevent the load from shifting on the trailer deck can be achieved by using plywood
between the trailer-deck and the cargo support area, see chapter “Lashing and Blocking” for more details.

You can calculate the height of the combined CoG as


follows: Multiply all weights with their respective
heights of CoG and summarize them. Divide this sum
by the total weight to find the combined CoG.

Formula 3 Height CoG (h) =


∑ (weight x height)
∑ weight
The reactors height of CoG above ground level is:
1500(trailer) + 675(saddle) + 2000(reactor) = 4175mm

Height CoG =
(750 x 32 ) + (4175 x120 ) = 52500 = 3436 mm (Formula 3)
(33 + 120 ) 153

This makes the Height CoG above tipping plane:

Height CoG = 3436 - 300mm = 3136mm

Trailer is still on 3-point suspension, so use 476 as tip arm!

476
Tan( α ) = = 0.152 = 15.2% (Formula 2)
3136

a = 8.6°

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 45 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

3.12 Summary

When neglecting any lashing arrangement, the mechanical stability of a trailer is only dependant of:

- Hydraulic setup of the trailer (Tipping Arm)


- Height of Cargo CoG, above tipping plane.

Below picture shows a trailer on 4 point suspension

Stable Neutral Unstable

Transport
CoG

Tip plane

Tip arm

When sufficient lashing is provided so we can use the combined CoG of trailer and cargo, the mechanical
stability of a trailer also depends on:

- Weight of Cargo
- Weight of Trailer

We need to look at the mechanical stability in every tipping direction of the trailer. When the trailer uses a 3-
point suspension, there are three tip directions. When it is on a four point suspension there are four tipping
directions.

Mammoet limits the mechanical stability angle to 7 degrees. This means that any transport with a
mechanical stability angle below 7 degrees is considered as critical and should be reviewed by a senior
engineer. This limit for the angle was decided on, because the actual position of the CoG and the actual
angle of the trailer is difficult to monitor in practice.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 46 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

4 Structural Stability

Structural stability is more identifiable in the field then mechanical stability. After loading, you can check if
the CoG is centrally placed by checking the hydraulic pressures of the fields. Independent of the selected
hydraulic setup, the pressures should be equal when the trailer is level. When there are differences in the
axle pressures, the CoG is off-centered.

After checking the placement of the load on the trailer, it is good practice to checkout the reaction of the
hydraulic setup of the trailer by setting the trailer deck just a little off-level (0.5 - 1 degree) using a spirit level.
By monitoring the hydraulic gauges during the rotation, you can make a prediction of the pressure
differences at larger angles. You will also get a feeling for the response time of the hydraulics, i.e. how quick
will the hydraulic system of the trailer react. Always check this while the load is still above its supports, and
always use “LOWERING” to make the pressures different, or when equalizing pressures. Always try to
“RIASE” all fields in the system at the same time while performing the check.

4.1 General principle

When we are checking the stability on strength, we actually check at which angle the axles of the platform
trailers will start to get overloaded due to the displacement of the center of gravity by the trailer angle.

Structural stability angle

G G
Transport
CoG

Ra Rb Ra Rb = Maximum
Image 9

When the cargo is centered on the trailer, both axles (Ra and Rb) will each take an equal amount of the
load. If the platform trailer is standing on a gradient, (Rb) will get a larger amount of the load then (Ra). A
greater gradient results in a bigger difference.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 47 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

This load transfer is cause by the movement of the center of gravity. The larger the transverse distance
between the center of gravity of the cargo and the center of the trailer, the more load will be transferred from
axle Ra to axle Rb. When the center of gravity of the cargo is exactly above axle Rb, axle Rb will carry the
entire load of the cargo whilst axle Ra carries nothing. Considering the loading conditions of our trailers, the
maximum possible axle load is already exceeded, so there is a limit for MaxX.

The maximum structural stability angle will be found when the maximum axle load is achieved.

From the image we can clearly see that the structural


stability angle is also dependent of the Height of CoG.

When the cargo is not loaded in the centre of the trailer, the
actual distance actX is changed and depending on which G
side of the trailer you are reviewing will become bigger or
smaller.

When actX grows bigger, the distance between MaxX and


actX becomes smaller, reducing the structural stability angle.

The weight and maximum axle load are the other factors that
impact the structural stability angle. In fact it is the ratio
between the maximum axle load and axle capacity that limits
the structural stability angle.

If an axle is loaded with 15 tons (gross, i.e. own weight + cargo weight), and its capacity is 17 tons, there is
an additional 2 tons capacity to take a shift in the CoG. When the axle is fully loaded to its maximum
capacity of 17 tons, there is 17 – 17 = 0 tons left, so even a slight movement in the CoG will cause an
overload, meaning: The structural stability is 0 degrees.

In general Mammoet has adopted a minimum structural stability angle of 2 degrees. This small angle was
chosen as the pressures on the trailers are easily monitored and adjusted.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 48 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

4.2 Structural stability by numbers

Below we have prepared a table for some standard SPMT configurations with the CoG loaded in the center
of the trailer. These tables were prepared for study purposes and are therefore for reference only.
Trailer type: Single KAMAG / Scheuerle'84/'94 Longitudinal spacing: 1.4 m
Cap.: 17 ton/axle Transversal spacing: 1.45 m
Cap.: 34 ton/line Deck height: 1.5 m
Limit: 2 ° Tipping plane: 0.3 m
Height CoG above Trailer deck [m]
Hydraulic Loading Total
Lines
Setup ratio Weight*
0.25 3.00 4.00 5.00 8.00 14.00 20.00 30.00 50.00 60.00

6 4:2 25% 51.0 44.5 18.7 15.3 12.9 8.8 5.3 3.8 2.6 1.5 1.3
6 4:2 50% 102.0 18.1 6.4 5.2 4.3 2.9 1.7 1.2 0.8 0.5 0.4
6 4:2 75% 153.0 6.2 2.1 1.7 1.4 0.9 0.5 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1
6 4:2 100% 204.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

6 4 Point 25% 51.0 56.3 27.3 22.6 19.3 13.3 8.1 5.8 3.9 2.4 2.0
6 4 Point 50% 102.0 26.5 9.7 7.9 6.6 4.5 2.7 1.9 1.3 0.8 0.6
6 4 Point 75% 153.0 9.4 3.2 2.6 2.2 1.5 0.9 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.2
6 4 Point 100% 204.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

8 6:2 25% 68.0 48.1 21.0 17.2 14.6 9.9 6.0 4.3 2.9 1.8 1.5
8 6:2 50% 136.0 20.4 7.3 5.9 4.9 3.3 2.0 1.4 0.9 0.6 0.5
8 6:2 75% 204.0 7.0 2.4 1.9 1.6 1.1 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1
8 6:2 100% 272.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

8 4 Point 25% 68.0 56.3 27.3 22.6 19.3 13.3 8.1 5.8 3.9 2.4 2.0
8 4 Point 50% 136.0 26.5 9.7 7.9 6.6 4.5 2.7 1.9 1.3 0.8 0.6
8 4 Point 75% 204.0 9.4 3.2 2.6 2.2 1.5 0.9 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.2
8 4 Point 100% 272.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

10 7:3 25% 85.0 46.2 19.8 16.2 13.7 9.3 5.6 4.0 2.7 1.6 1.4
10 7:3 50% 170.0 19.1 6.8 5.5 4.6 3.1 1.9 1.3 0.9 0.5 0.4
10 7:3 75% 255.0 6.6 2.2 1.8 1.5 1.0 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.1
10 7:3 100% 340.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

10 6:4* 25% 85.0 41.8 17.1 14.0 11.8 8.0 4.8 3.5 2.3 1.4 1.2
10 6:4* 50% 170.0 16.6 5.8 4.7 3.9 2.6 1.6 1.1 0.7 0.4 0.4
10 6:4* 75% 255.0 5.6 1.9 1.5 1.3 0.8 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1
10 6:4* 100% 340.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

10 4 Point 25% 85.0 56.3 27.3 22.6 19.3 13.3 8.1 5.8 3.9 2.4 2.0
10 4 Point 50% 170.0 26.5 9.7 7.9 6.6 4.5 2.7 1.9 1.3 0.8 0.6
10 4 Point 75% 255.0 9.4 3.2 2.6 2.2 1.5 0.9 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.2
10 4 Point 100% 340.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 49 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

Trailer type: Single KAMAG / Scheuerle'84/'94 Longitudinal spacing: 1.4 m


Cap.: 17 ton/axle Transversal spacing: 1.45 m
Cap.: 34 ton/line Deck height: 1.5 m
Limit: 2 ° Tipping plane: 0.3 m
Height CoG above Trailer deck [m]
Hydraulic Loading Total
Lines
Setup ratio Weight*
0.25 3.00 4.00 5.00 8.00 14.00 20.00 30.00 50.00 60.00

12 8:4 25% 102.0 44.8 18.9 15.5 13.1 8.9 5.4 3.8 2.6 1.6 1.3
12 8:4 50% 204.0 18.3 6.5 5.2 4.4 2.9 1.8 1.3 0.8 0.5 0.4
12 8:4 75% 306.0 6.3 2.1 1.7 1.4 0.9 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1
12 8:4 100% 408.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

12 4 Point 25% 102.0 56.3 27.3 22.6 19.3 13.3 8.1 5.8 3.9 2.4 2.0
12 4 Point 50% 204.0 26.5 9.7 7.9 6.6 4.5 2.7 1.9 1.3 0.8 0.6
12 4 Point 75% 306.0 9.4 3.2 2.6 2.2 1.5 0.9 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.2
12 4 Point 100% 408.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

18 12:6 25% 153.0 44.9 19.0 15.5 13.1 8.9 5.4 3.9 2.6 1.6 1.3
18 12:6 50% 306.0 18.4 6.5 5.3 4.4 3.0 1.8 1.3 0.8 0.5 0.4
18 12:6 75% 459.0 6.3 2.1 1.7 1.4 1.0 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1
18 12:6 100% 612.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

18 4 Point 25% 153.0 56.3 27.3 22.6 19.3 13.3 8.1 5.8 3.9 2.4 2.0
18 4 Point 50% 306.0 26.5 9.7 7.9 6.6 4.5 2.7 1.9 1.3 0.8 0.6
18 4 Point 75% 459.0 9.4 3.2 2.6 2.2 1.5 0.9 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.2
18 4 Point 100% 612.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
*Total weight includes trailer weight and power pack. **This table is only valid when CoG is loaded in center of trailer

4.3 Influences on the Structural stability

In the previous paragraphs, we looked at the structural stability in the transverse direction only, but you
should also consider the load transfer front-to-back when the trailer is driving down a slope. However, a
height difference in the length results in a smaller angle then a height difference in the width due to the large
distance between pressure points(i.e. the width is generally smaller then the length). This changes when we
change the hydraulic setup of the trailer so we need to make sure that we look at all possibilities.

• The height of the center of gravity of the cargo.


• The weight of the cargo.
• The offset of the center of gravity of cargo from trailer centre.
• The height of the trailer-deck.
• The weight of the trailer (combination).
• The hydraulic setup of the trailer.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 50 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

4.4 Calculation of the Axle loads

The calculation of the maximum load on a field is largely related to the calculation of the actual axle
pressures in the static condition. When the cargo is loaded in the center of the trailer it is easy to calculate
the axle pressures, by dividing the weight of cargo + trailer by the amount of axles, but we cannot use this
method when the CoG is not in the center of the trailer.

In any case we can use the previously determined support points of the hydraulic fields, and the reference
distance of the CoG to the tipping lines of the trailer. We then transpose the axle reactions in line with the
tipping line. For the example we use the previously used transport combination.

The triangle height (La) is also the support distance between Ra and Rb+Rc.

We are now able to calculate the field loads:

Ra =
(G x CoGa )
La
And:
Rb + Rc =
(G x (La - Coga) )
La

When the CoG is in the center of the trailer, then Ra equals Rb so we can easily divide by 2.

Rb = Rc =
(G x (La - Coga) )
2 x La

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 51 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

When the CoG is not in the center and we wish to calculate Rb, we first need to find the triangle height Lb
and the CoGb. As we know the height (La) and width (Track width w) of the triangle, we can calculate the
area of the triangle. Also we are able co calculate hypotheses “B” between Rc and Rb. If we take
hypotheses “B” as the base of the triangle, we can find the height of the triangle (Lb) in the direction of Rb.

W x La
AreaTriangle =
2
B x Lb
AreaTriangle =
2
B= ( La 2 + ( 0.5 xW 2 )

Combining these makes:


W x La B x Lb ( La 2 + ( 0.5 xW 2 ) x Lb
= =
2 2 2
La x W
Lb =
( La 2 + ( 0.5 xW 2 )

To find CoGb is even more elaborate: Zoom-in on


so we review sub triangle G-Rc-Rb, with legs B, K
and M, for which we can calculate their lengths.

B= ( La 2 + ( 0.5 × W ) 2 )

M= ( CoGa 2 + ( 0.5 × W + Y ) 2 )

K= (( La − CoGa ) 2 + (Y ) 2 )

With these lengths we can calculate the area of


triangle (G-Rc-Rb):
Area = Sx( S − B )x( S − M )x( S − K )
Where
1
S= x( B + M + K )
2

From this we calculate the height of that triangle.

CoGb = 2 × Area × B

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 52 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

4.4.1 Example: Calculation of the axle loads

Trailer on 3-point suspension!


Diameter reactor = 4000mm
Trailer height = 1500mm
Track width = 1450mm
Saddle height = 675mm
Axle height = 300mm
SPMT axle spacing = 1400mm
Reactor weight = 120t
Trailer weight = 32t (26[6Liner] + 6[PPU])
Trailer CoG height = 750mm above ground level
Maximum axle-line load = 17t/axle (34t per line).

In our example:
W = 120tCargo + 33tTrailer = 153t
La = 3 axles x 1400 = 4200mm
CoGa = 1 axle x 1400 = 1400mm

Ra =
(153 x 1400 ) = 51.0t
4200

As the CoG is in the center of the trailer we can use Formula (X) to find Rb and Rc.

Rb = Rc =
(153 x (4200 - 1400) ) = 51.0 t
2 × 4200

This result in the following axle loads:


Field A (4 cylinders) = 51.0 / 4 = 12.75t
Field B (4 cylinders) = 51.0 / 4 = 12.75t
Field C (4 cylinders) = 51.0 / 4 = 12.75t

Fortunately for us, these results are the same as when we simply divide the total weight by the number of
cylinders: 153.0t / 12cylindres = 12.75t. With these axle loadings there is 17.0t – 12.75t = 4.25t of capacity
left to cope for any additional forces, such as a load transfer due to the gradient of the road. If the trailer
would be fully loaded (17.0t), there would be 0t capacity left, and result in a structural stability of 0 degrees!

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 53 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

4.5 Calculation of the Structural stability

The maximum allowable displacement of the center of gravity can be determined with the help of the
maximum allowable load of the axle. The larger the transverse distance between the center of gravity of the
cargo and the center of the trailer, the more load will be transferred from axle Ra to axle Rb. When the
center of gravity of the cargo is exactly above axle Rb, axle Rb will carry the entire load of the cargo whilst
axle Ra carries nothing.

When calculating the stability on strength, we use a similar method, except this time we know the reaction
“Ra-Max” which equals the “Field capacity”. This enables us to calculate the maximum allowable CoG
position MaxX. We need to do this in each field direction i.e. over each tipping line.

L * Field capacity
MaxX =
total Weight(G)

This determines the Maximum possible distance between the pivot and the CoG. If we look the image below
which indicates the location of these distances we can determine that we can calculate the Structural
stability angle as:

MaxX - actX
Tan α =
Height CoG Transport

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 54 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

4.5.1 Example: Transport details

For the following example we use the same arrangement as in the


chapter “Mechanical stability”

SPMT trailer height = 1500mm


SPMT axle spacing = 1400mm
SPMT track width = 1450mm
SPMT axle height = 300mm
SPMT CoG height = 750mm above ground level
Trailer weight = 33t (26[6Liner] + 7[PPU])

Reactor weight = 120t


Diameter reactor = 4000mm
Saddle height = 675mm

We already calculated the Total Weight (153.0t) and the combined CoG height (3136mm).

We also need the field capacity: As we have 3 fields with each 4 cylinders of 17.0t so:

Ramax = Rbmax = Rcmax = 4 x 17.0 = 68.0t

We determine length L from the hydraulic setup of the trailer

La = 3 axles = 4200mm

4200 × 68.0
MaxX = = 1867 mm
153

This makes the maximum possible angle:

1867 - 1400
Tan α ( o ) = = 0.149 = 14.9%
3136

a = 8.5° (When tilting toward Ra)

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 55 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

To calculate MaxX in direction of Rbmax (shown in red): As the hydraulic setup is symmetrical and the CoG is
loaded in the center, so the calculation of RB and RB is exactly the same.

From the mechanical stability calculation we found that the tip arm (a) was 476mm. As the CoG is loaded in
the center (front-back AND left-right), we can assume the triangle height to be 3 x the tip arm, so

Lb = 3 x 476 = 1428mm

This results in a MaxX of

1428 * 68.0
MaxX = = 635 mm
153

As the combined CoG has not changed (3136), this makes the
maximum possible angle:

635 - 476
Tan α ( o ) = = 0.050 = 5.0%
3136

a = 2.9°. (When tilting to either side)

Note: It may be obvious that as long as the hydraulic setup provides a base that is wider then the height of
the triangle, the side-ways stability will be smaller then front-back. Also, when the CoG is not on the centre
line of the trailer, the difference between MaxX and actX will be smaller, reducing the structural stability
angle.

This calculation also proves that, “side-ways stability fields” with a large number of axles will improve
sideways stability. This in turn reduces the number of axles in the floating field, so we can only do this until
the sideways stability equals the forward stability.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 56 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

4.6 Summary

The structural stability angle mainly depends on ratio between the axle load and the axle capacity and the
height of the Center of Gravity.

An offset of the cargo’s Center of Gravity from the center of the trailer will reduce the structural stability
considerably.

We need to look at the structural stability in every tipping direction of the trailer, if the trailer uses a 3-point
suspension, there are three tip directions, when it is on a four point suspension there are four tipping
directions.

Mammoet uses a structural stability limit of 2°. This means that any transport with a structural stability angle
below 2 degrees is considered as critical and should be reviewed by a senior engineer. This limit is smaller
then the 7° for mechanical stability as the hydraulic pressures are an accurate readout for the actual camber
of the trailer.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 57 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

5 Dynamic influences

Until now, we have only considered the static stabilities (mechanical and structural) of the platform trailers.
In reality there are many external factors working on trailer and cargo which influence these stabilities.

The main external factors are:

• Centrifugal force.
• Acceleration/Deceleration forces.
• Wind pressure.

An accurate prediction of the expected forces can be made through calculations, but it would be very
impractical to use the actual formulas and expected factors as they may vary per situation. In stead,
Mammoet has adopted impact factors to cover for a large range of issues:

Impact factor for centrifugal forces of transports at high speeds: 50%


Impact factor for centrifugal forces of transports at low speeds: 2%

Impact factor for acceleration/deceleration for transports at high speeds: 80%


Impact factor for acceleration/deceleration for transports at low speeds: 5%

As the wind area of the cargo has a large influence on the wind pressure, we need to be calculated for each
different situation. The wind force depends on the maximum expected wind speed and the projected area of
the cargo. This wind force causes a moment on the trailer in both longitudinal and transverse direction. This
moment affects the axle pressures and reduces the mechanical stability.

The centrifugal force causes a moment in the lateral plane of the transport that affects the axle pressures
and reduces the mechanical stability. In general the fields providing the side-ways stability absorb the
centrifugal forces, depending on the hydraulic setup.

The acceleration/deceleration force causes a moment in the driving direction of the transport that affects the
axle pressures and reduces the mechanical stability. In general either the floating field or the split fields
absorb the acceleration/deceleration forces, depending on the hydraulic setup.

All combinations of the above mentioned forces add up to the dynamic axle loads. Within Mammoet we
have agreed to maintain the static stability angles and that the dynamic forces will affect the axle loadings
only.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 58 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

5.1 Centrifugal force

When you round a corner in your car, you seem to be pushed to the outside of the curve. This is referred to
as the centrifugal force. This force is not due to something actually pushing you in that direction, but by your
body's inertia trying to keep you moving in a straight line. The car is actually curving around in front of you
and intercepting you in your straight line path. The car door pushes you towards the center of the curve and
makes you change direction and move in a circle with the car.

This centrifugal force depends on the mass of the object, the speed of rotation, and the distance from the
center. The more massive the object, the greater the force; the greater the speed of the object, the greater
the force; and the less distance from the center, the greater the force.

Similar to what was explained in the paragraph regarding the wind pressure, this centrifugal force causes a
moment working on the trailer, affecting the mechanical stability and the axle pressures. The difference here
is that the trailer experiences this force only in one direction, laterally on the driving direction.

The effect of this centrifugal force is only small for SPMT transports due to the lower speeds, but
conventional transporters can be seriously affected by this centrifugal force. It is therefore important to
reduce the speed of the transport while negotiating a turn or corner.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 59 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

5.2 Calculation of the centrifugal force

The formula to calculate the centrifugal force is defined as:

Centrifugal Force = m x v² / r Where “v” is the speed in m/sec and “r” the curve radius in m.

As working with this formula is very impractical due to the different speeds and cornering radii, Mammoet
has adapted an Impact factor to cover the most likely occurring situations. This factor is different for
Conventional Transport (General Cargo) and for Self Propelled transport.

High speed transport:


Average minimum Curve radius taken at speed : 60 m
Average maximum speed through corner : 60 km/h (=16.7m/sec)

Centrifugal Force = m x 16.7² / 60 [N]


Centrifugal Force = m x 4.62 [N]
Centrifugal Force = 0.462 x m [kg]*  rounded to : 50%**

Slow speed transport:


SPMT average minimum Curve radius : 10 m
SPMT maximum speed : 5 km/h (= 1.389 m/sec)

Centrifugal Force = m x 1.389² / 10 [N]


Centrifugal Force = m x 0.193 [N]
Centrifugal Force = 0.0193 x m [kg]*  rounded to : 2%

* If we want to express force in kg or tons we divide by 10 (F=m*a (a=10m/s²))


** This 50% is the factor advised by trailer manufacturer Nooteboom.

When performing a site move with conventional or hydraulic platform trailers at


low speed, use the above factor of 2%, as speed is the governing factor.

The additional axle load can now be calculated as:

TotalWeigh t × Im pactFactor × HCoGcombin ed


Rturn =
Track width × Number of cylinders

Note: Track width = distance between hydraulic pressure points!

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 60 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

5.3 Acceleration / Deceleration forces

Acceleration forces occur in the driving direction of the transport and are caused by the objects inertia.
Inertia is the resistance an object has to a change in its state of motion, that is, if an object has a certain
speed, its want to maintain that speed, or when it is stationary, it wants to remain stationary. To start or stop
moving or to change its velocity will require an external force.

Inertia has cost the crash test dummy in the image dearly, the car
was forced to change its speed by the wall in front of it and the
force to accomplish this has wrecked his car.

The crash test dummy’s body also has inertia, and when not
restrained, the body would be flying through the windshield.
Fortunately he was wearing his seatbelt and the airbag was
deployed so the energy of the impact was absorbed.

In general, acceleration and brake


forces occur in longitudinal direction of
the transport. By reducing the
abruptness of a change of speed we
considerably reduce the forces involved.

5.4 Calculation of the acceleration force

From the first two laws of Newton we know that:

Acceleration force F=mxa (Where m = mass and a = acceleration)


Speed difference v=axt (Where v = speed and t = time difference in sec.)

Acceleration force F=mxv/t

Thus: If speed difference is large, so will be the acceleration force. If the time to accomplish this speed
difference is small, the acceleration force will be large.

As working with this formula is very impractical due to the different speeds and times, Mammoet has
adapted an Impact factor to cover the most likely occurring situations. This factor is different for
Conventional Transport (General Cargo) and for Self Propelled transport.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 61 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

Conventional Transport:
To determine the maximum impact factor for conventional transport we can look at the maximum possible
grip that can be provided by the vehicle. In general, most vehicles are able to make their wheel spin or slide
on the asphalt, either by putting the pedal to the metal, or by braking. This means that the limit is the friction
between the tyre and the road surface.

From various references we can


Sliding friction coefficients
find the following table. From this
table we find, the maximum
Material Dry Wet Greasy
coefficient for rubber on any Wood on wood 0.20 - 0.50 0.20 - 0.25 0.15 - 0.05
material is 1.2 and this is Metal on wood 0.20 - 0.50 0.20 - 0.25 0.10 - 0.02
probably a very special type of Metal on metal 0.10 - 0.25 0.10 - 0.20 0.10 - 0.01
rubber as used in racing tyres Rubber on concrete 0.50 - 1.20 0.45 - 0.80 -
and can only be achieved at Rubber on asphalt 0.35 - 1.20 0.25 - 0.80 -
particular temperatures of the Rubber on gravel 0.40 - 0.85 0.40 - 0.8 -
tyre. From the specifications of Rubber on rock 0.55 - 0.75 0.55 - 0.75 -
the tyre manufactures, the Rubber on ice 0.07 - 0.25 0.05 - 0.10 -

globally provided coefficient is Rubber on snow 0.10 - 0.55 0.30 - 0.60 -

0.8 for normal truck tyres.

The maximum friction force (Ffriction = m x g x µ.) is 0.8 * Weight, or : 80%

Self Propelled transport:


The above mentioned 80% would be much too high for self propelled transport. The speeds of the
transports are already lower, and the difference in the reaction time of all hydraulic or pneumatic systems
already exceed the actual deceleration time of the transport at those speeds. To calculate a more realistic
figure, an emergency stop time of 3 seconds while transporting 100t at a speed of 5km/h (=1.38m/s).

Acceleration force = m x v / t [N]


Acceleration force = m x 1.38 / 3 [N]
Acceleration force = m x 0.462 [N]
Acceleration force = m x 0.0462 [kg]*  rounded to : 5%

* If we want to express the Acceleration force in kg or tons we divide by 10 (F=m*a (a=10m/s²))

To convert the acceleration/brake forces into an additional axle load we have to divide the longitudinal
moment caused by this force, by the distance of the centers of gravity of the representative fields and the
number of axles in this field.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 62 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

5.5 Wind pressure

When wind is blowing against an object it builds up pressure again the “wind catching” area of that object.
Wind is free to blow from any direction, so we need to look for this wind pressure in each direction.

The total wind pressure represents a force that has its attachment point in the wind pressure point. When
the resulting wind force is working on the side and/or the front/rear of the object it will create a moment on
that object. If the wind is strong enough, the object will eventually tip over, so there must be an effect of this
wind force on the mechanical stability of the object.

In fact, the wind has no influence on the geometrical shape of the points of support, but because its
combined with the weight of the object with the lateral wind forces resulting in a total force which is working
under a specific angle. The effect caused by the wind is similar to placing the object on a gradient.

Besides affecting the mechanical stability of the object, it also influences the support reactions. At the side
that is receiving the wind, the load is reduced while the opposing side will receive higher loadings.

Besides building up pressure on the windward side of the object, the sheltered side of the object
experiences a vacuum due to the faster moving air.

Cross section Plan view

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 63 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

The amount of wind pressure depends on the actual wind speed and the shape of the object. If an object
has large open spaces, the air building up the pressure can “escape” through these open spaces, reducing
the pressure in front of the object. When an object has rounded corners, the air is “guided” over these
corners, again reducing the total wind pressure.

• Rounded shape with nothing sticking out: 80%


• Rounded shape with something sticking out: 100%
• Rounded shape with many things sticking out: 120%
• Block shape: 120%

5.6 Wind pressure calculation.

Wind force = wind pressure (Pwind) x cargo wind area x shape factor

Depending on the wind direction you want to calculate, use the front-view area (width x height) or the side
view area (length x height) as the cargo wind area.

The wind pressure on the surface of the load determines the resulting wind force. The wind pressure can be
approximated by: Pressure = ½ x (density of air) x (wind speed)2 x (shape factor) [N] The density of air is
about 1.25 kg/m3. The shape factor (drag coefficient) depends on the shape of the body. The wind speed
must be expressed in m/s. See below table:

Beaufort Limit Limit Pressure


Description Description on Land
scale [m/s] [knots] [kg/m²]
0 Calm 0.2 1 0 Smoke rises vertically
1 Light winds 1.5 3 0.14
2 Light breeze 3.3 7 0.68 Wind felt on face; leaves rustle; ordinary vanes moved by wind.
3 Gentle breeze 5.4 12 1.82
4 Moderate breeze 7.9 18 3.9 Raises dust and loose paper; small branches are moved.
5 Fresh breeze 10.7 24 7.1 Small trees in leaf begin to sway; crested waves form on waters
6 Strong breeze 13.8 31 11.8 Large branches in motion; whistling heard in telephone wires
7 Near gale 17.1 38 18.2 Whole trees in motion; inconvenience felt when walking against wind.
8 Gale 20.7 46 26.7 Twigs break off trees; progress generally impeded.
9 Strong gale 24.4 54 37.1 Structural damage occurs -roofing dislodged; larger branches break
10 Storm 28.4 63 50.2 Trees uprooted; considerable structural damage.
11 Violent storm 32.5 72 66.2
Very rarely experienced - widespread damage
12+ Hurricane over 32.5 over 73 >66.2

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 64 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

The additional vertical loads per hydraulic field are obtained by dividing the appropriate wind moment by the
width of the track-width in both longitudinal and transverse direction. The additional axle load is then the
division of this force by number of axles in the field.

Fwind × H pressurepo int


Rturn =
Support distance × Number of cylinders

This results in the following formulas for the axle loads due to longitudinal or transversal wind:

Transversal:

Lc arg o × H c arg o × Pwind × H pressurepo int × Shapefacto r


RTturn =
Track width × Number of cylinders

Longitudinal:

Wc arg o × Hc arg o × Pwind × H pressurepo int × Shapefacto r


RLturn =
Support distance × Number of cylinders

NOTE: At Mammoet we always assume a maximum of 6 Beaufort. Above this wind speed, more detailed
engineering is required.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 65 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

6 Lashing & Blocking

As explained in the mechanical stability chapter, the instability of the transport can resort into one of the
following scenarios:
A. The load tips over on the trailer deck.
B. The load makes the trailer tip over.
C. The load skids over the trailer deck, causing the trailer to tip
D. The load makes the trailer tip over a little, then slides of the trailer deck.

The function of lashing and blocking is to fixate the cargo on the deck of the trailer when under the influence
of the transportation loads. Basically it is to prevent scenarios A, C and D. This must mean that lashing is
very important, because if lashing is done properly there is only one scenario left, where the combination of
trailer and cargo tip over.

As is made clear from these scenarios, the cargo needs to be properly secured by using the lashing and
blocking in the correct direction.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 66 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

6.1 Transport forces

The transport forces discussed in this section largely depend on the transport speed and applicable
accelerations which in turn are determined by the type of transport:

• Road transport. (High speed transports)


• Site moves. (Slow speed transports)

The transport forces we need to examine are the following:

• Acceleration forces (speeding-up and braking)


• Centrifugal forces (turning in a corner)
• Driving on slopes

The acceleration and centrifugal forces are dynamic forces and we have already discussed them in the
chapter “Dynamic stability”. The other subject handles driving on slopes. When driving up a longitudinal
slope, there is some load transfer from front to back, but as the trailer is relatively long, there is little chance
of instability or overloading. However when driving through a bend with camber, the risk of losing trailer
stability as shown in scenario A, B and D is much higher due to the relative narrow width of the trailer. It is
therefore assumed that the transverse stability is governing.

6.2 Acceleration forces

When a transport combination is traveling on the road and its needs to slow down, the cargo has a tendency
to keep moving in the direction it was moving. The same is true for acceleration, when the object is
stationary it needs to be forced to start moving. This effect is called inertia and both forces are referred to as
acceleration forces. The direction of these forces is longitudinally and horizontally and can be countered by
forward and backward lashing.

If the cargo is not secured to the trailer with additional lashing, the friction between the cargo and the trailer
deck (in the drawing the transport beams are used) is the only thing keeping the cargo from sliding over the
trailer deck.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 67 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

The friction force can be calculated by multiplying the friction coefficient between the two materials (in this
case wood on steel) with the Normal force (downward force) on the transport beams. The friction coefficient
when using plywood in the table below, it ranges from 0.20 to 0.5, we choose to use 0.25.

Sliding friction coefficients

Material Dry Wet Greasy


Wood on wood 0.20 - 0.50 0.20 - 0.25 0.15 - 0.05
Metal on wood 0.20 - 0.50 0.20 - 0.25 0.10 - 0.02
Metal on metal 0.10 - 0.25 0.10 - 0.20 0.10 - 0.01

The impact factors for acceleration can be found in the chapter “Dynamic stability”:
For transports at high speeds this factor is 80%
For transports at low speeds this factor is 5%

High speed transports:

Facc = Weight Cargo x 0.80


Ffrict = Weight Cargo x 0.25 (plywood)

This means that the friction force alone cannot keep the load in position when the maximum brake force is
applied. The required lashing in the forward direction is 0.80-0.25 = 0.55 x weight or:

Required lashing high speed with plywood: 55% x Weight Cargo [t]
Required lashing high speed without plywood: 80% x Weight Cargo [t]

Slow speed transports:

Facc = Weight Cargo x 0.05


Ffrict = Weight Cargo x 0.25 (plywood)

The resulting friction is five times higher than what is required when using plywood, even when we assume
metal on metal with a friction coefficient of 0.1, the friction is two times higher.

For slow speed transport NO additional lashing or blocking is required.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 68 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

6.3 Centrifugal forces

When a truck is driving through a corner, the cargo has a tendency to continue its motion in a straight line, in
stead of following the trailer that is going through the corner. The force causing this is the centrifugal force,
which depends on the weight of the cargo, the distance to the center line and the speed. The direction of
this force is laterally and horizontally and can be countered with sideways lashing.

Again we can use the curve impact factors we found in the chapter “Dynamic stability”:
For transports at high speeds this factor is 50%
For transports at low speeds this factor is 2%

For high speed transport this results in:

Fturn = Weight x 0.50


Ffrict = Weight x 0.25 (plywood)

The amount of side-ways lashing and/or blocking when using plywood is = 0.50-0.25 = 0.25 x Weight:

Required lashing high speed with plywood = 25% x Weight [t]


Required lashing high speed without plywood = 50% x Weight [t]

For slow speed transport this results in:

Fturn = Weight x 0.02


Ffrict = Weight x 0.25 (plywood)

The resulting friction is more then ten times higher than what is required when using plywood, even when
we assume metal on metal with a friction coefficient of 0.1, the friction is 2.5 x higher.

For slow speed transport NO additional lashing or blocking is required.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 69 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

6.4 Trailer Camber

Driving on slopes will cause the load to want to slide off. In general a transverse slope results in a bigger
angle then a longitudinal slope. It is therefore assumed that the transverse gradient will be the governing
factor.

In theory, the lashing required to be able to use the combined


stability angle would need to be able to lift one side of the trailer,
regardless of the weight of the load. This would mean that the trailer
could be on its side and the load would still be fixed on the trailer. As
this is not the most practical way to use a trailer, we use the
maximum expected camber to calculate the horizontal and vertical
lashing.

We limit the maximum expected camber to 22 degrees which is the maximum stroke on one side of a single
wide SPMT trailer. As this is the trailer type with the smallest track-width and trailer deck width, this is also
the worst case and a reasonably conservative method to determine horizontal and vertical lashing for driving
on a road with camber.

In this situation, the lashing force required to lift the left side of the trailer can be calculated as:
Fv Lashing = (670 x W Trailer) / 1793 = W Trailer x 37.4%
Note that the vertical lashing is required on two sides of the trailer.

The force that makes the load slide of the trailer deck can be resolved by the horizontal lashings:
Fh Lashing = W Cargo x sinus (22°) = W Cargo x 38.2%
Please note that the horizontal blocking or lashing is required in both directions.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 70 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

It might be clear that if the trailer is actually wider, or the stroke in an axle is less then the previously
mentioned 600mm, the lashing requirements for driving on a slope will be reduced. The table below
indicates some of the forces that can be expected for that type of trailer (arrangement).

Width of Max Max


Width Vertical Horizontal
Trailer type support stroke camber
Trailerdeck lashing lashing
[mm] [mm] [º]

Single SPMT 2430 1450 600 22.5 37.4% 38.2%


Double SPMT 5330 2900 600 7.9 35.2% 13.7%
Triple SPMT 8230 4350 600 4.7 34.6% 8.2%

Single Cometto 3000 1800 600 18.4 37.5% 31.6%


Double Cometto 6300 3600 600 9.5 36.4% 16.4%

Nooteboom 8axle MCO-00-MCA-28 2500 2000 200 5.7 44.4% 10.0%


Nooteboom 8axle MCO-121-08V-25-96 2720 2200 200 5.2 44.7% 9.1%
Nooteboom 4axle MCO-581-04V 2470 1967 200 5.8 44.3% 10.1%

Goldhofer 5 axle SKP-H5 2750 2250 200 5.1 45.0% 8.9%


Goldhofer 5 axle SKP-H5 2750 1850 450 13.7 40.2% 23.6%

As is shown from the table, the maximum possible camber is the main denominator for the lashing
requirements.

Please note that in most cases, plywood would suffice to make up the horizontal lashing as this results in
25% friction!

Please note that when we enlarge the spacing between the trailer trains, the required amount of vertical and
horizontal lashing will reduce, maximum possible camber is smaller.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 71 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

6.5 Lashing under angles

In the previous paragraphs we discussed the lashing in each direction of the trailer:

• Longitudinal (Horizontal)
• Transversal (Horizontal)
• Vertical

In reality it is not always possible or practical to attach the lashing in the exact direction where it is required
so many times we have to compromise. When we place lashing under an angle, we need to ensure that the
effective capacity of the lashing in the required direction is still sufficient to withstand the transport loads.

To determine the resulting components from a given


capacity, we can use the following figures.

- cosine (45) = 0.707 ~ 70%


- cosine (30) = 0.866 ~ 90%
- cosine (60) = 0.5 = 50%

To determine the required capacity


from the components, use the
following figures:

- 1 / 0.707 = 1.414 ~ 140%


- 1 / 0.866 = 1.154 ~ 115%
- 1 / 0.5 = 2 = 200%

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 72 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

6.6 Example

In the example picture, the box is fixed to a SPMT using 2


(front and rear) crossways lashings. The angles of these
lashings are approximate 45 degrees to the horizontal.

Trailer weight: 32t + 6t (PPU) = 38t.


Cargo weight: = 90t.

Single trailer SPMT has maximum lope of 22.5º and therefore requires 38.2% horizontal lashing.
Additionally it requires an impact factor for turning of 2% in the transverse direction, and a 5% impact factor
for acceleration/deceleration in the longitudinal direction.

Transversal = (38.2 % + 2 %) x 90t = 36.8t


Longitudinal = 5 % x 90t = 4.5t

Use plywood so we can reduce the requirements in the horizontal directions by 25%

Transversal = (38.2 % + 2 % – 25 %) x 90 = 13.7t


Longitudinal = (5 % – 25 %) x 90 = 0.0t (can’t be less then 0)

With the lashing angles of 45º makes the required lashing (140%):
For transversal = 13.7 x 140% = 19.2t (left AND right)
For longitudinal = 0 x 140% = 0.0t

Required Vertical Lashing:


The image on the right shows that for this particular
case, the stability of the cargo is bigger then the angle
of the trailer deck when the trailer fails.

It also shows that the combination already tips over at


a smaller angle. This means the box is stable by itself
and makes the required vertical lashing 0t.

However, the transversal component, is governing and


we need two ratchets with a capacity of 10t each to cover one direction. So in total we need 4 chains of 10t
to prevent the load from sliding over the deck side-ways.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 73 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

Another example:

A box of 180t is placed on a double SPMT.

The angles of these lashings are approximate


45 degrees to the horizontal.

Trailer weighs 2 x (4 x 8 + 6) = 76t.

Transversal = 13.7 % (slope) + 2 % (corner) x 180 = 28.3[t]


Longitudinal = 5 % (acceleration) x 180 = 9.0[t]

Use plywood so we can reduce the requirements in the horizontal directions by 25%
Transversal = 13.7 % (slope) + 2 % (corner) – 25 % (friction) x 180 = 0.0[t] (can’t be less then 0)
Longitudinal = 5 % (acceleration) – 25 % (friction) x 0 = 0.0[t] (can’t be less then 0)

Required lashing:
For transversal and longitudinal =0 x 140% = 0.0t

Vertical lashing:
In this case, both the combined stability and cargo stability are bigger then the maximum possible angle.
Therefore, no vertical lashing is required.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 74 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

6.7 Lashing of cargo on saddles

When a column is loaded on the trailer


using saddles, they may require lashing
when the saddles are relatively high or
when they are unfit to transfer the loads
created by accelerations of the transport.
The unsecured saddle might to flip over in
between the trailer and column during the
accelerations.

The forces induced by acceleration are transferred through the saddles, to the trailer, causing a moment
that needs to be resolved by the weight of the column in the saddles. Occasionally the column manufacturer
welds clips on the saddle or lashes the saddle to the column using binding straps over the column. This
reduces the risk of flipping the saddles considerably. When a column is being transported on a ship without
any additional horizontal bracing in the ships hold, it is safe to assume that the saddle arrangement can
cope with the acceleration forces of the trailer. When in doubt, it is recommended to reduce the moment
over the saddles by adding to add 50% horizontal lashing for when traveling a high speeds or 5% when
traveling at lower speeds.

Below is an example of a possible solution to connect the lashing. When using this type of arrangement,
one of the lashings will take the acceleration forces while the other will resolve the braking forces. To use
this type of arrangement, the ratio between saddle height and the distance needs to be below 1:10.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 75 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

When the height of the saddles is insufficient and the saddle arrangement is still potentially unstable, you
can invert the lashing as shown in the diagram below. A potential problem with this type of lashing is to find
the appropriate lashing points on the column.

6.8 Lashing of cargo on turn tables

When the cargo is transported on saddles, these same rules apply to using turntables, where this effect is
increased by the fact that the pivot point of the table cannot transfer the moment induced by the acceleration
forces. When using turntables you also need to consider the pull-forces of the rear dolly, especially if the
dolly has no propulsion system. In this situation, the cargo drags the rear dolly along and these dragging
forces are transferred through the saddles. To avoid these forces going through the saddles, we can use
tirfor wires between the decks of the two turntables.

The rolling resistance of normal truck tires is 2% of the axle/wheel load or: the total rolling resistance of the
transport arrangement is 2% of the total weight. In case of using turntables, the required capacity for the
tirfor between the dolly’s is equal to the rolling resistance of the rear dolly, which is 2% of the sum of the
portion of the weight carried by the rear dolly plus the weight of the dolly itself.

Weight of Reactor = 200t with a center of gravity at equal distances to the saddles
Weight of Trailer = 42t
Weight of Turntable = 4.5t
Weight of Load-spreading = 5t
Total Load on Dolly = 100 + 42 + 4.5 + 5 = 151.5t

Rolling resistance = 151.5 x 2%


= 3.03t

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 76 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

When the transport needs to negotiate slopes like ramps and wedges, there is an added effect that the rear
dolly is being pushed down the slope by the weight of the reactor. We need to add the effect of the ramp to
the rolling resistance of the dolly.

The effect of the slope is calculated as follows:


Slope (example) = 1:20 = 2.86°
Total Load on Dolly = 100 + 42 + 4.5 + 5 = 151.5t

Horizontal component on slope = sin (2.86) * 151.6t


= 7.57t additional

For acceleration and braking, we assume the impact factor which we have determined for slow moving
transports in the dynamics chapter, so that would be 5%.

Total Load on Dolly = 100 + 42 + 4.5 + 5 = 151.5t


Horizontal component = 151.5t * 5%
= 7.57t

CAUTION
W HEN IT IS REQUIRED THAT THE TRACTOR PUSHES THE TRANSPORT INSTEAD OF PULLING, THE
USE OF A TIRFOR WIRE IS FUTILE AND YOU NEED TO RESOLVE THE HORIZONTAL FORCES USING
CAUTION LASHING BETWEEN THE COLUMN AND THE TURN-TABLE DECK.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 77 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

6.9 Single file SPMT’s

Special attention should be given for movements with a Single file SPMT (single wide trailer, single train)
which, due to the small track width, have a low transverse stability on tipping. The most practiced method to
increase the sideways stability of a single file trailer is to use a four point suspension.

Avoid driving single file trailer sideways! The acceleration and


deceleration forces in the transverse direction combined with the
lower stability angle of a single train SPMT can cause the trailer to
tip over. Use diagonal steering instead.

To further worsen the above effect, the tipping width is reduced as


the wheels will start acting as pivot points. Depending on the height
of the trailer, the distance between the wheel centers provide a
variable width of the tipping plane.

The same goes for single file trailers positioned under large constructions. If the trailer is insufficiently
secured to the construction, the trailer has a tendency to move from underneath the cargo, especially when
the train is in a single field. In that case the oil can flow freely from the right to the left cylinder. The resulting
stability of the support to the construction will be less then when there is hydraulic separation. Use bracing
between supports, or tie the load to the trailer, which basically restricts the support from tipping.

The image on the far right shows a Kamag trailer. As the “knees” of this trailer point in one direction, this will
create an eccentricity moment when the train is in a single field (note that the axle pressures are equal due).
This moment needs to be resolved by the support and the construction to be equilibrium, so the support
needs to be able to do that.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 78 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

6.10 Summary

From this chapter we have learned that:

• The purpose of lashing and blocking is to secure the cargo on the trailer.
• Lashing should be provided in the required direction.
• When using lashing under an angle, it resolves multiple directions, but it decreases the
horizontal and vertical components.
• Special care should be taken for single file SPMT’s

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 79 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

7 Conclusion

In practice the stability on strength and stability on tipping will always need to be calculated to see which of
the stabilities is critical.

The smallest value is the governing value and should never be exceeded.

Stability angle Limits:


• Minimum stability on tipping angle: 7°
• Minimum stability on strength angle: 2°

Dynamic impact factors:


• Wind forces need to be calculated by area and shape
• Rolling resistance of tires 2% W cargo.
Road transport:
• General acceleration/brake impact factor 80% W cargo.
• General cornering/turn impact factor 50% W cargo.
Site moves:
• General acceleration/brake impact factor 5% W cargo.
• General cornering/turn impact factor 2% W cargo.

Cargo shape factors:


• Tubular shape with almost no protrusions: 0.8
• Tubular shape with almost no to some protrusions: 1.0
• Tubular shape with a lot of protrusions: 1.2
• Block shape: 1.2

At Mammoet engineering these forms of stability are calculated with the use of a calculation sheet in Excel
and the acTrailer program. After entering the required data into the program or the calculation sheet it
automatically calculates the axle pressures and the allowable stability angles and reports back if the
situation is allowable or not.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 80 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

8 Calculation examples

In the following example we look at transporting a vertical reactor of 70 ton on a single Scheuerle SPMT
with the following details:

Weight of reactor : 80t


Trailer : Single train SPMT
Weight trailer : 2 x 16t (4liner) + 6.7 (power pack)
Trailer CoG : 1500mm above road surface (When fully extended)
Axle pivots : 285mm above road surface.

As this object already looks unstable, and we are using a single wide trailer, this example will look at all the
possibilities to improve the stability of the transport.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 81 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

8.1 Three-point suspension

8.1.1 Stability on tipping

In this example we use 8 * 2 = 16 cylinders  group1 = 4 cylinders, group 2 & 3 = 6 cylinders

The left image shows the stability triangle in more


detail. From this we deduct the stability arm (a):

C = (5600 2 + 725 2 ) = 5647mm


a = (725 * 4200) / 5646 = 539mm

When we assume that the cargo is not firmly connected to the transporter.

This makes the height above tipping plane: 9000 – 285 = 8715mm.

Tan α = 539 / 8715 = 0.0618 = 6.18%

α = 3.53° < 7°, NOT OK!

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 82 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

When we use chains to lash the cargo firmly to the trailer, we need to ensure that the vertical component of
the used lashing is sufficient to lift the trailer. In our case this is 38.7 Ton x 37.4% per side.

As the angle of the lashings is at approximately 60 degrees we know we need at least:

115% x 37.4% x 38.7t / 2 = 8.3t (So use 10t ratchets).

If we assume the weight trailer to be (2 x 16t (4liner) + 6.7 (power pack)) = 38.7t and the height of the CoG
on 1500mm above the road level, the combined CoG of Cargo + Trailer will be:

X = (80 * 9000 + 38.7 * 1500) / (80 + 38.7) = 6555 mm

This makes the height above tipping plane 6555 – 285 = 6270mm

Tan α = 539 / 6270 = 0.086 = 8.6%

α = 4.9° < 7°, NOT OK!

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 83 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

To reduce the combined CoG even more, we place 50Tons of additional counterweights on the trailer deck.
The required amount of vertical lashing is for this situation is (38.7 + 50) x 37.4% per side.

As the angle of the lashings is at approximately 60 degrees we know we need at least:

115% x 37.4% x (38.7t + 50) / 2 = 19.0t each side (So use 4 x 10t ratchets).

Combined CoG of Cargo + Counterweight + Trailer:

X = (80 * 9000 + 38.7 * 1500 + 50 * 2100) / (80 + 38.7 + 50) = 5234mm

This makes the height above tipping plane 5234 – 285 = 4949mm

Tan α = 539 / 4949 = 0.109 = 10.9%

α = 6.2° < 7°, NOT OK!

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 84 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

8.2 Four-point suspension

As the trailer configuration in the previous paragraph is still not sufficiently resolved, we change its hydraulic
setup to a 4-point suspension. As per the diagram below (4 x 4 x 4 x 4).

8.2.1 Stability on tipping

The previous calculated heights of the COG will be the same for the 4-point suspension so:

Cargo not fixed to trailer (8715mm): tan α = 725 / 8715 = 0,083 = 8.3%
α = 4.76° < 7°, NOT OK!.

Cargo fixed to trailer (6270mm): tan α = 725 / 6270 = 0.116 = 11.6%


α = 6.60 °< 7°, NOT OK!

Cargo fixed + 50t CWT (4949mm): tan α = 725 / 4949 = 0.146 = 14.6%
α = 8.30°> 7°, OK!!!!

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 85 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

8.3 Stability on strength

Now that we know that the combination can be transported safely without the risk of tipping over, we need to
determine the stability on strength:

The total weight of the combination = 80 + 38.7 + 50 = 168.7t

Maximum allowable axle load 17t 17 x 8 x 1450 = X x 168.7  x = 1169mm


Maximum allowed CoG movement: 1169 – (1450 / 2) = 444mm
Maximum allowed α tan α = 444 / 4949
α = 5.1°> 2°, OK!!!!
As the stability angle on strength is the smallest value (5.3° < 8.3°), this will be the governing stability angle
for the transport.

STABILITY LIMIT 5.1°

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 86 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

8.4 Dynamic axle loads

Axle loads in static condition (no wind or accelerations):


(Please note that the eccentricity of the PPU has not been accounted for in this example)

Axles in Field A = 168.7 / 16 = 10.5t


Axles in Field B = 168.7 / 16 = 10.5t
Axles in Field C = 168.7 / 16 = 10.5t
Axles in Field D = 168.7 / 16 = 10.5t

Additional axle loads due to acceleration / braking

Acceleration impact factor: 5%

H acc. = 168.7 x 5% = 8.435t

V acc. = (8.435 x 4949) / (2 x 2800)


V acc. = 7.45t (per 8 axles)
V acc. = 0.93t/axle

Additional axle loads due to cornering

Cornering/Turn factor = 2% of the combined transport weight

H turn = 0.02 x 168.7


H turn = 3.374t
V turn = (3.374 x 4949) / (1450)
V turn = 11.52t (per 8 axles)
V turn = 1.44t/axle

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 87 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

Additional axle loads due to transfers wind

Allowable wind force for transport = 8 Beaufort = 25 kg/m2 = 0,025 t/m2

Shape area of Reactor = 42.5 m2, shape factor = 0.8


2
Shape area of CWT (l=1.65, h=1.8) = 3.0 m , shape factor = 1.2

F wind op Reactor = 0.8 * 42.5 * 0.025 = 0.85t


F wind op CWT = 1.2 * 3.0 * 0.025 = 0.09t

Z Reactor = ½ * 8500 + (1500 - 300) = 5450 mm.


Z CWT = ½ * 1800 + (1500 - 300) = 2100 mm.

V t-wind = (0.85 * 5450 + 0.09 * 2100) / (1450)


V t-wind = 3.325t (per 8 axles)
V t-wind = 0.42t/axle

Additional axle loads due to longitudinal wind

Allowable wind force for transport = 8 Beaufort = 25 kg/m2 = 0,025 t/m2

Shape area of Reactor = 42.5 m2, shape factor = 0.8


Shape area of CWT (l=2.4, h=1.8) = 4.32m2, shape factor = 1.2

F wind op Reactor = 0.8 * 42.5 * 0.025 = 0.85t


F wind op CWT = 1.2 * 4.32 * 0.025 = 0.13t

Z Reactor = ½ * 8500 + (1500 - 300) = 5450 mm.


Z CWT = ½ * 1800 + (1500 - 300) = 2100 mm.

V l-wind = (0.85 * 5450 + 0.13 * 2100) / (2 * 2800)


V l-wind = 0.88t (per 8 axles)
V l-wind = 0.11t/axle

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005


Client Mammoet Field Employees Sap Nr. Page 88 of 88
Project Training & Development Programme Doc. Nr. Date February 23rd, 2006
Subject TP 06 – Trailer Stability & Lashing Ref. Rev. 3

Summary
Axle Loads

Field A Field B Field C Field D


Description:
Static 10.5 10.5 10.5 10.5

Acceleration/Brake ± 0.93 ± 0.93 ± 0.93 ± 0.93

Cornering ± 1.4 ± 1.4 ± 1.4 ± 1.4

Wind transverse ± 0.42 ± 0.42 ± 0.42 ± 0.42

Wind longitudinal ± 0.11 ± 0.11 ± 0.11 ± 0.11

Max Axle load 13.36t 13.36t 13.36t 13.36t

Min Axle load 7.64t 7.64t 7.64t 7.64t

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system, or published, in any form or by any means,
electronically, mechanically by print, photo print, or recording or otherwise without prior written permission from Mammoet Holding B.V..

Office Mammoet Europe B.V.

Status Issued for Information

 Mammoet Holding B.V. 2005