DESIGN AND FEM ANALYSIS OF

SYMMETRICAL LIFTING BEAM

 PROJECT TMP301

Purpose

Purpose of this document is to understand the design methodology and

process of lifting beam followed by its FEM analysis.

Table of Contents

1
 PROJECT TMP301

1 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................................7

1.1 BACKGROUND AND PROBLEM STATEMENTS...................................................................................................... 7

1.2 PROJECT GOALS AND LIMITATIONS ................................................................................................................. 7
1.2.1 Goals: ................................................................................................................................................ 7
1.2.2 Limitations:........................................................................................................................................ 8
1.3 QUALITY ASSURANCE INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS. ........................................................................................... 9
1.4 SYMBOLS AND TERMINOLOGY ....................................................................................................................... 9

2 DESCRIPTIONS ....................................................................................................................................... 10

2.1 REQUIREMENTS SPECIFICATIONS.................................................................................................................. 10

2.2 CONCEPTS DISCUSSIONS ............................................................................................................................. 11
2.2.1 Lifting Rack ...................................................................................................................................... 11
2.2.1.1 Concept A............................................................................................................................................... 11
2.2.1.2 Concept B ............................................................................................................................................... 11
2.2.1.3 Concept C ............................................................................................................................................... 12
2.2.2 Lifting Lugs ...................................................................................................................................... 12
2.2.2.1 Concept A............................................................................................................................................... 12
2.2.2.2 Concept B ............................................................................................................................................... 12
2.2.2.3 Concept C ............................................................................................................................................... 13
2.3 SELECTED SOLUTION ................................................................................................................................. 13

3 BASIC CALCULATIONS, ELEMENTS AND DESIGN SELECTION ................................................................... 13

3.1 STATIC FORCES AND MOMENTS .................................................................................................................. 13
3.1.1 Load Case I (15 tons) ....................................................................................................................... 13
3.1.1.1 Calculation of Shear Force ..................................................................................................................... 16
3.1.1.2 Calculation of Bending Moment ............................................................................................................ 18
3.1.2 Load Case II (10 tons) ...................................................................................................................... 19
3.1.2.1 Calculation of Shear Force ..................................................................................................................... 22
3.1.2.2 Calculation of Bending Moment ............................................................................................................ 23
3.2 SELECTION OF STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS, DESIGN AND STATIC CALCULATIONS .......................................................... 25
3.2.1 HEB320 profile ................................................................................................................................. 25
3.2.2 Checking HEB320 Profile for Deflection........................................................................................... 25
3.2.3 Shackles and Rope ........................................................................................................................... 26
3.2.4 Wire Rope and Sling ........................................................................................................................ 28
3.2.5 Lifting Rack ...................................................................................................................................... 29
3.2.5.1 Bering Stress in Hole .............................................................................................................................. 30
3.2.5.2 Shear Stress in Lifting Rack .................................................................................................................... 30
3.2.5.3 Sleeve Plates .......................................................................................................................................... 31
3.2.6 Lifting Lugs ...................................................................................................................................... 31
3.2.6.1 Bering Stress in Hole .............................................................................................................................. 32
3.2.6.2 Shear Stress in Lifting Lug ...................................................................................................................... 32
3.2.7 Buckling of HEB320 Profile .............................................................................................................. 33
3.2.8 Welding Safety Calculations ............................................................................................................ 34
3.3 DYNAMIC LOADS AND FATIGUE CALCULATIONS ............................................................................................... 35
3.3.1 Dynamic Loads ................................................................................................................................ 35
3.3.1.1 Load Case I ............................................................................................................................................. 35
3.3.1.2 Load Case II ............................................................................................................................................ 36
3.3.2 Fatigue Analysis .............................................................................................................................. 36
3.3.2.1 Fatigue of Lifting Rack ............................................................................................................................ 37
3.3.2.2 Fatigue in Lifting rack Weld .................................................................................................................... 37
3.3.2.3 Fatigue of the Lifting Beam Material ..................................................................................................... 39

2
 PROJECT TMP301

4 FEM ANALYSIS ....................................................................................................................................... 40

4.1 MODELLING AND SUPPORTS ....................................................................................................................... 40

FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS WAS PERFORMED ON THE LIFTING BEAM IN ANSYS, WHERE CAD GEOMETRY FROM CREO PARAMETRIC IS
IMPORTED IN ANSYS. EFFORT IS MADE TO MESH THE MODEL USING QUAD-ELEMENTS TO AVOID ANY ANALYTICAL RIGIDITY IN
.......................................................................................................................................................... 40
STRUCTURE.
........................................................................................................................... 40
FE MODEL IS SHOWN IN FIGURE 17
4.1.1 Elements and Sizing......................................................................................................................... 41
4.1.2 Load Case I ...................................................................................................................................... 42
4.1.3 Load Case II ..................................................................................................................................... 44
4.2 COMPARISON AGAINST HAND CALCULATIONS ................................................................................................ 47

5 CAD PRESENTATION (2D / 3D) ............................................................................................................... 47

5.1 CAD MODELLING ..................................................................................................................................... 48

5.2 VISUALIZATION 3D ................................................................................................................................... 48
5.3 CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS 2D ................................................................................................................... 51
5.4 WORKSHOP DIRECTIONS ............................................................................................................................ 55

6 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................................. 55

7 LITERATURE REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................... 56

3
 PROJECT TMP301

List of Tables

Table 1 List of Symbols ........................................................................................................................... 9

4
 PROJECT TMP301

List of Figures

Figure 1 Lifting Rack Concepts 11

Figure 2 Lifting Lug Concepts 12
Figure 3 FBD of Load Case I 14
Figure 4 FBD of Load Case I (Detailed) 15
Figure 5 Axial Force along beam length 16
Figure 6 Shear Force Plot Load Case I 18
Figure 7 Bending Moment Diagram Load Case I 19
Figure 8 FBD of Load Case II 19
Figure 9 FPB of Load Case II (Detailed) 20
Figure 10 Axial Force along beam length 22
Figure 11 Shear Force Diagram Load Case II 23
Figure 12 Bending Moment Diagram Load Case II 24
Figure 13 Figure showing Shackles Catalogue 28
Figure 14 Lifting Rack Dimensions 30
Figure 15 Lifting Lug Dimensions 32
Figure 16 Lifting Rack Fatigue in Weld 38
Figure 17 FEA Model of Lifting Beam 40
Figure 18 Elements Quality Bar Graph 41
Figure 19 Elements Aspect Ratio Graph 41
Figure 20 Elements Skewness Graph 42
Figure 21 Boundary Conditions Load Case I 42
Figure 22 Stress (Von-Mises) in lifting beam Load Case I 43
Figure 23 Stress (Von-Mises) in HEB320 Profile only Load Case I 43
Figure 24 Deflection in Lifting Beam Load Case I 44
Figure 25 Fatigue Life (Days) Load Case I 44
Figure 26 Boundary Conditions Load Case II 45
Figure 27 Stress (Von-Mises) in lifting beam Load Case II 45
Figure 28 Stress (Von-Mises) in HEB320 Profile only Load Case II 46
Figure 29 Deflection in Lifting Beam Load Case II 46
Figure 30 Fatigue Life (Days) Load Case II 47
Figure 31 Lifting Beam HEB320 CAD Model 48
Figure 32 Lifting Rack CAD Model 49
Figure 33 Lifting Lug CAD Model 49
Figure 34 Sleeve CAD Model 50
Figure 35 Stiffener CAD Model 50
Figure 36 Lifting Beam Assembly CAD Model 51
Figure 37 2D Drawing of Lifting Lug 52
Figure 38 2D Drawing of Lifting Rack 52
Figure 39 2D Drawing of HEB320 I Beam 53
Figure 40 2D Drawing Sleeve 53
Figure 41 2D Drawing of Stiffener 54
Figure 42 2D Lifting Beam Assy Drawing (SHEET 1) 54

5
 PROJECT TMP301

Figure 432D Lifting Beam Assy Drawing (SHEET 2) 55

6
 PROJECT TMP301

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background and Problem Statements

Lifting beams are commonly used in every industry for lifting heavy loads through cranes and
hoists. They allow heavy loads to be lifted and uniformly distributed over a large span
minimizing the stress on the structures and lift loads safely. Lifting beams geometry consists of
a long structural member called BEAM supported at ends and load is applied through a single
hoist or crane. It converts the lifting loads into bending moments through the beam.
Disadvantage of lifting beams is that it converts all the loads into bending moments which
makes the usage of material less efficient and hence lifting beams are often heavy and costs high
due to excessive use of materials. The advantage of lifting beams is that they require less
headroom to perform the lifting operation. They can also be made in smaller manufacturing
shops and hence easy to fabricate/manufacture.
The problems associated with lifting beams can be minimized by applying engineering
principles and designing them in such a way that they are as efficient as possible. A problem
statement is at hand to design a lifting beam with following functional requirements and
limitations
Design a lifting beam with carrying capacity of 9 tons and 15 tons in two different scenarios.
There will be two loading scenarios with different loads and different loading points on beam
profile. The load points and location will is shown in next section.
.

1.2 Project Goals and Limitations

1.2.1 Goals:

 Find suitable dimensions for length width and height of beam profile against given loads
with proper factor of safety
 Design the lifting beam with the weight budget mentioned in requirements

 Design of lifting brackets with appropriate dimensions

 Design of lifting ears with appropriate dimensions

 Minimize bending stress in top bracket weld joints

7
 PROJECT TMP301

1.2.2 Limitations:

 The beam profile should be HEB

 Elastic Modulus of material (Steel) is E = 2.1 × 105 MPa

 Steel rope at the lifting beam should have loops at ends whose length must be 25 times
diameter of rope
 Lifting beam shall be 10 meters long and under temperature fluctuations, the length can
be increased by 100 mm
 There should be 10 lifting points and 8 ribs for reinforcement of beam

 Steel rope with all accessories should be selected from catalog

 Thickness of beam bolts and pins should have same diameter as the thickness of the
beam ears, welding of the beams members should be done in such a way that the
minimum weld thickness is not less than minimum thickness of the welded members

 Calculations and formulae should be part of the report instead of extra sheets
attachments

 Axial force, shear force and bending moment diagrams for both load cases should be
part of the report

 Minimum safety factor for bucking loads may be taken as n B = 4. σ Allowed = R m / n B

 Bearing stress in the holes conforms to the same factor of safety as for buckling loads

 Maximum allowable deflection in the lifting beam is defined by the following relation

 Where L is length of lifting beam and fmax is the maximum deflection. From the above
relation, we can calculate the maximum allowable deflection as

 Factor of safety for welds on brackets and lifting ears against static loads will be σAllowed
= Rm / 4

 For buckling loads and same will be applied for bearing stress as well.

8
 PROJECT TMP301

 A dynamic loading factor of 1.5 will be incorporated to accommodate jerks and shocks
while lifting

 Design Factor Fatigue (DFF) will be kept 3 for load fluctuations

 Fatigue life calculation

 Suggest NDC inspections methods for ensuring the safety of lifting beam throughout its
fatigue life span

 Calculation of beam for buckling and torsional buckling in load case 2.

1.3 Quality Assurance International Standards

The quality of report and design both have been in accordance with the project report instructions
provided. All the contents have been verified and reviewed twice.

All the figures, tables, have been checked for errors. Reports have been proof read for grammatical
mistakes, spelling errors and formatting abnormalities. References have been cross checked.

The design process of lifting beam and functional requirements are strictly as per the project report
template. All the limitations mentioned in project report template have been taken into account during
the design process of lifting beam. Safety factors are taken into account, fatigue factor and dynamic
loading factors have been considered while doing the calculations. The results from hand calculations
and from FEM Analysis of the CAD geometry against given load cases have been compared and
difference is recorded. Safety standards and design standards used for lifting beam have been taken
into account during the design process of lifting beam.

1.4 Symbols and terminology

All the symbols, abbreviations and nomenclatures used in this report have been summarized in
following table.
Sr.
Symbol Unit Description
No

Table 1 List of Symbols

9
 PROJECT TMP301

2 DESCRIPTIONS

The descriptions of the project report consists of following elements

 Requirement Specifications

 Concept Discussion

 Selected Solution

2.1 Requirements Specifications

 The beam profile should be HEB

 The length of the lifting beam should be 10 meters.

 Due to temperature fluctuations of the environment, permissible increase in the overall

length of the beam is 100 mm.
 The loops at the end of steel ropes must have length equal to 25 times diameter of the
rope
 There should be 10 lifting points and 8 ribs for reinforcement of beam

 Steel rope with all accessories should be selected from catalog

 Thickness of beam bolts and pins should have same diameter as the thickness of the
beam ears, welding of the beams members should be done in such a way that the
minimum weld thickness is not less than minimum thickness of the welded members
 Axial force, shear force and bending moment diagrams for both load cases should be
part of the report

 Minimum safety factor for bucking loads may be taken as n B = 4. σ Allowed = R m / n B

 Maximum allowable deflection in the lifting beam is defined by the following relation

 Where L is length of lifting beam and fmax is the maximum deflection. From the above
relation, we can calculate the maximum alloable deflection as

10
 PROJECT TMP301

 Factor of safety for welds on brackets and lifting ears against static loads will be
σAllowed = Rm / 4

 For buckling loads and same will be applied for bearing stress as well.

 A dynamic loading factor of 1.5 will be incorporated to accommodate jerks and shocks
while lifting

2.2 Concepts discussions

Following are different design options considered for some critical parts of the beam with their pros
and cons. The decision is based on the usability of the material, minimum stress and maximum safety of
the lifting beam in operation.

2.2.1 Lifting Rack

One of the critical parts of a lifting beam is its lifting rack or eye. The criticality of this part is it being the
load transferring medium. It not only carries the weight of payload but the lifting beam as well which
makes it the most critical part. The design intent for the lifting rack is to minimize the bending stress or
bending moment in the component. Three options have been designed for the lifting rack which are
shown in Figure 1

Figure 1 Lifting Rack Concepts

2.2.1.1 Concept A

Concept A is very simple and symmetric but due to the fact that when the lifting racks are loaded, the
line of action of the load is usually 45 degrees towards the center of the beam, this means the half of
the weld area in the lifting rack A will be carrying most of the load which increases the chance of failure,
hence concept A might look symmetrical and appealing to eyes but it does not sever the design intent.

2.2.1.2 Concept B

In concept B, most of the material and weld surface is in line with the load and hence it can yield best
results for uniform load distribution over the weld area and through the material, also it would
minimize the bending moment on the lifting rack because most of the material is in tensions load due

11
 PROJECT TMP301

to the 45 degree inclination of loading axis. However welding area is less in this concept which increase
stress in localized regions.

2.2.1.3 Concept C

Concept C has 90 degree angle with the beam surface from one side, this implies that there will be
bending moment in that face of the lifting race at welding area, and also the welding area is great in
this concept.

2.2.2 Lifting Lugs

Lifting lugs are key component of a lifting beam. The load on all the lifting lugs is uniformly distributed
over the span of the beam equally divided on all the lifting lugs. 10 lifting lugs are used in our intended
design hence each lug will carry 1/10 of total load in both load cases. Three options have been designed
for the lifting rack which are shown in Figure 2

Figure 2 Lifting Lug Concepts

2.2.2.1 Concept A

Concept A has a cantilever beam profile with cross section area gradually increasing from support point
toward load point. This is a good choice of profile because the stresses are evenly distributed
throughout the material and all the material is utilized equally. The only drawback this concept has is
the bearing stress that has less material to resist against the load.

2.2.2.2 Concept B

Concept B is almost similar to concept A with the difference that concept A has a linear vartion in the
cross section area from top to bottom while the concept B has a parabolic (2nd order) variation in the
cross section area from top to bottom. But since in a point load configuration on a beam, the bending
moment varies linearly from the support end towards beam end, a linear variation in the cross sectional
area is desirable.

12
 PROJECT TMP301

2.2.2.3 Concept C

Concept C is opposite to Concept A. In this case, the lifting lug undergoes an increasing bending
moment and welding area around the lug is not easy to reach. So this concept has more drawbacks
than the rest.

2.3 Selected Solution

Following are the design option for lifting rack and lifting lug selected based on the arguments and
engineering principles discussed below.

Lifting Rack: Concept C is chosen for lifting due to following plus points

 Maximum welding area

 Less acute angles in the profile to deal with
 Negligible bending moment due to conversion of loads in tensile direction

Lifting Lug: Concept A is chosen for lifting due to following plus points

 Concept A has a linear variation in cross section area from support point towards load point
which maps with the stress pattern and bending moment in the member.
 Although it has some drawbacks as if the load line is not completely vertical, the edges may
collide with the rope but due to higher safety of design, it is selected and further designed in
the following report.

3 BASIC CALCULATIONS, ELEMENTS AND DESIGN

SELECTION

In this topic, we will discuss the design calculations of selected concepts in detail.

3.1 Static Forces and Moments

The mass distribution of the lifting beam is described as kg mass per unit length of beam. From
standard HEB300 profile, the mass is 117kg/m of length. The free body diagram shows the forces acting
on the beam. First goal is to find the normal force and the shear force diagram (profile) in the beam.

Static forces and moments

3.1.1 Load Case I (15 tons)

We have two load cases; first case is 15 tons load distributed on the beam at three support points as
shown in Figure 3.

13
 PROJECT TMP301

Figure 3 FBD of Load Case I

Total force on the beam is given by

Ftotal mg
Ftotal 15000 9.81 147150 N

Since there are three load points on the beam, force on each load point can be obtained by dividing the
total force with 3.

F
Fp  total
3
147150
Fp  49050 N
3

Weight of the beam per unit length has a dynamic factor of safety of 1.4 due to the fact that there are
other components which make the durability of the lifting beam questionable like ropes and shackles,
so weight per unit length of beam is calculated as

w mg
w 117 9.811.4 1606.8 N

Total weight of the beam is given by

Wt w.l
Wt 1606.8 10 16068 N

Total vertical axis force is sum of weights of load and the lifting beam hence

Fy Wt Ftotal
Fy 16068 147150 163218N

14
 PROJECT TMP301

Figure 4 FBD of Load Case I (Detailed)

Figure 4 shows the component resolution of force in the rope attached to the lifting racks. Since we
have a 45° angle of the rope with the horizontal and vertical axis, so the vertical and horizontal
components of the total force will be equal.

Fwy Fwx

Since there are only two lifting racks, hence the total vertical force is divided on each lifting rack equally
due to the symmetry of loads

F 163218
Fwy  y  81609 N
2 2

Hence

Fwx 81609 N

Center point of load transition is always at the center of the support point, the location of support point
is calculated as follows.

Height of beam is 300mm while the center of the lifting rack hole is 200mm from the top of the beam.
To calculate the point of application of force Fw on the lifting beam, we calculate distance X, by looking
at the triangle ABC, we see that angle ABC is 45 degrees, this implies that

15
 PROJECT TMP301

BC AC

Since BC lies on the centerline of beam, hence we take a point O at the intersection of lifting rack
profile and beam top surface, such that

300
OC  150
2
OA 200
AC OA OC 350

Since distance of center point of lifting rack from beam side is 1200 mm, hence

Lx 1200 BC
Lx 1200 350 850mm

Axial force diagram based on above calculation is shown in Figure 5

Figure 5 Axial Force along beam length

3.1.1.1 Calculation of Shear Force

Following calculations shows the shear force through the lifting beam cross section along its length.

There are four portions of the lifting beam, for first portion, we call it Fs1

1: 0 x 850mm
F shear Fp wx
FS1 49050 1606.8 x

For 2nd portion, we call it Fs2

16
 PROJECT TMP301

2 : 850 x 5000mm
F shear Fwy Fp wx
FS 2 81609 49050 1606.8 x
FS 2 32559 1606.8 x

For 3rd portion, we call it Fs3

3 : 5000 x 9150mm
F shear Fwy Fp Fp wx
FS 3 81609 49050 49050 1606.8 x
FS 3 16490 1606.8 x

For 4th portion, we call it Fs4

4 : 9150 x 1000mm
F shear Fwy Fwy Fp Fp wx
FS 4 81609 81609 49050 49050 1606.8 x
FS 4 65118 1606.8 x

By plotting all above four equations over length of beam profile, we get following shear force diagram
as shown in Figure 6

17
 PROJECT TMP301

Figure 6 Shear Force Plot Load Case I

3.1.1.2 Calculation of Bending Moment

Following calculations shows the bending moment through the lifting beam cross section along its
length.

There are four portions of the lifting beam, for first portion, we call it M1

1: 0 x 850mm
2
wx
M Fp x  2
M 1 49050 x 803 x 2

For 2nd portion, we call it M2

2 : 850 x 5000mm
2
wx
M Fwy ( x 0.85) Fp ( x 0)  2
2
1606 x
M 2 81609 x 81609 0.85 49050 x 
2
2
M 2 69367 32559 x 803x

Considering the symmetry of the loads, the bending moment will reverse its direction; hence the signs

in the equation will reverse.

18
 PROJECT TMP301

Figure 7 Bending Moment Diagram Load Case I

3.1.2 Load Case II (10 tons)

Figure 8 FBD of Load Case II

Total force on the beam is given by

Ftotal mg
Ftotal 10000 9.81 98100 N

Since there are three load points on the beam, force on each load point can be obtained by dividing the
total force with 3.

F
Fp  p
3
98100
Fp  32700 N
3

19
 PROJECT TMP301

Weight of the beam per unit length has a dynamic factor of safety of 1.4 due to the fact that there are
other components which make the durability of the lifting beam questionable like ropes and shackles,
so weight per unit length of beam is calculated as

w mg
w 117 9.811.4 1606.8 N

Total weight of the beam is given by

Wt w.l
Wt 1606.8 10 16068 N

Total vertical axis force is sum of weights of load and the lifting beam hence

Fy Wt Ftotal
Fy 16068 98100 114168N

Figure 9 shows the component resolution of force in the rope attached to the lifting racks. Since we
have a 45° angle of the rope with the horizontal and vertical axis, so the vertical and horizontal
components of the total force will be equal.

Figure 9 FPB of Load Case II (Detailed)

20
 PROJECT TMP301

Since there are only two lifting racks, hence the total vertical force is divided on each lifting rack equally
due to the symmetry of loads

F 114168
Fwy  y  57084 N
2 2

Hence

Fwx 57084 N

Center point of load transition is always at the center of the support point, the location of support point
is calculated as follows.

Height of beam is 300mm while the center of the lifting rack hole is 200mm from the top of the beam.
To calculate the point of application of force Fw on the lifting beam, we calculate distance X, by looking
at the triangle ABC, we see that angle ABC is 45 degrees, this implies that

BC AC

Since BC lies on the centerline of beam, hence we take a point O at the intersection of lifting rack
profile and beam top surface, such that

300
OC  150
2
OA 200
AC OA OC 350

Since distance of center point of lifting rack from beam side is 1200 mm, hence

Lx 1200 BC
Lx 1200 350 850mm

Axial force diagram based on above calculation is shown in Figure 10

21
 PROJECT TMP301

Figure 10 Axial Force along beam length

3.1.2.1 Calculation of Shear Force

Following calculations shows the shear force through the lifting beam cross section along its length.

There are six portions of the lifting beam, for first portion, we call it Fs1

1: 0 x 850mm
F shear wx
FS 1 1606.8 x

For 2nd portion, we call it Fs2

2 : 850 x 2110mm
F shear Fwy wx
FS 2 57084 1606.8 x

For 3rd portion, we call it Fs3

3 : 2110 x 5000mm
F shear Fwy Fp wx
FS 3 57084 32700 1606.8 x
FS 3 24384 1606.8 x

Due to symmetry of loads, the other three portions will have similar magnitude but opposite in
direction.

By plotting all above three equations over length of beam profile, we get following shear force diagram
as shown in Figure 11

22
 PROJECT TMP301

Figure 11 Shear Force Diagram Load Case II

3.1.2.2 Calculation of Bending Moment

Following calculations shows the bending moment through the lifting beam cross section along its
length.

There are six portions of the lifting beam, for first portion, we call it M1

1: 0 x 850mm
2
wx
M  2
M 1 803 x 2

For 2nd portion, we call it M2

2 : 850 x 2110mm
2
wx
M Fwy ( x 0.85)  2
2
1606 x
M 2 57084 x 57084 0.85 
2
2
M 2 48521 57084 x 803 x

For 3rd portion, we call it M3

23
 PROJECT TMP301

3 : 2110 x 5000mm
2
wx
M Fwy ( x 0.85) Fp ( x 2.11)  2
2
1606 x
M 3 57084 x 57084 0.85 32700 x 32700 2.11 
2
2
M 3 20475 24384 x 803x

Considering the symmetry of the loads, the bending moment will reverse its direction; hence the signs
in the equation will reverse.

Figure 12 Bending Moment Diagram Load Case II

From the graph, we find that maximum bending moment occurs at mid span of beam that is at center
where length of beam is 5 meters.

Hence

M max 20475 24384 x 803x 2

M max 20475 24384 5 803 52 122320 Nm

By comparing both the load cases, we find that maximum bending moment occurs in center in load
case I is less than in load case II although overall vertical load in load case II is smaller. This is because of
position of the all the load points in the center of lifting beam.

Hence all the design process and calculations will be done against load case II which has greater value
of bending moment.

24
 PROJECT TMP301

3.2 Selection of structural elements, design and static calculations

The selection process for HEB profile and the dimensioning for material is based on load case II where
the largest bending moment occurs.

3.2.1 HEB320 profile

For the load case II, HEB320 profile is selected as a test case and all the calculations will be checked to
see if it qualifies for the given design requirements. Input data is given below

M II 122320 Nm
Fwx 57084 N
A 16.1103 mm 2
 B 4
 y 510MPa

Allowable stress is given by

 y 510
 allowable   127.5MPa
B 4

Maximum Tensile stress in the section is given by

M F
 max  II  wx
I yy A
122311103 57084
 max  3
 67 MPa
1926 10 16.1103

 max  allowable

Since maximum tensile stress is less than allowable tensile stress, hence beam profile is qualified for
tensile load

3.2.2 Checking HEB320 Profile for Deflection

The requirements for maximum deflection in the lifting beam is given by

By using Macaulay's method

25
 PROJECT TMP301

Fp 32700 N 32.7kN
Fwy 57084 N 57.08kN
w 1606 N / m 1.606kN / m
2
1607 x
M ( X ) 57.08( x 0.85) 32.7( x 2.11) 32.7( x 5) 32.7( x 7.89) 57.08( x 9.15) 
2
2

3
1607 x
10 EI . y '' 57.08( x 0.85) 32.7( x 2.11) 32.7( x 5) 32.7( x 7.89) 57.08( x 9.15) 
2
2 2 2 2 2 3

3
57.08( x 0.85) 32.7( x 2.11) 32.7( x 5) 32.7( x 7.89) 57.08( x 9.15) 1607 x
10 EI . y '       C1
2 2 2 2 2 6
3 3 3 3 3
57.08( x 0.85) 32.7( x 2.11) 32.7( x 5) 32.7( x 7.89) 57.08( x 9.15) 1607 x 4
C1 x C2
3
10 EI . y      
6 6 6 6 6 24

By putting the boundary condition at x=0.85, y=0

C2 0.85C1 0.035

By putting the boundary condition at x=9.15, y=0

C2 9.15C1 2668.7

By solving the above two equations simultaneously for C1 and C2, we get

C1 321.53
C2 237.33

Since maximum deflection occurs at

3 3 3 3 3 4
3
57.08(5 0.85) 32.7(5 2.11) 32.7(5 5) 32.7(5 7.89) 57.08(5 9.15) 1607 5
10 EI . y       321.53 5 273.33
6 6 6 6 6 24

103 EI . y 827.7

827.7 103
y
EI

827.7 103
y 0.0127m 12.7mm
1
2.1105 10002 308.2 106 ( )
10004

Since the calculated deflection is less than the maximum deflection permissible, hence HEB320 profile is
qualified for deflection criteria.

3.2.3 Shackles and Rope

Choice of shackles for attachment to lifting racks is also critical, the load case I will be used for selection
of shackles as the greatest force that is passing through lifting racks and ultimately shackles is in load

26
 PROJECT TMP301

case I. The force in single shackle can be calculated by using Pythagoras theorem because the angle is
45°.

Fw  Fwx2 Fwy2

Fw  816092 816092
Fw  1.332 1010 115413N

The highlighted series shackle from Green Pin is selected. The illustration is also shown in the selected

shackles has a load bearing capacity of 13.2 tons and hence it is safe for the maximum load of 11.8 tons

from load case II

Material: bow and pin high tensile steel, Grade 6, quenched and tempered

Safety Factor: MBL equals 6 x WLL

Standard: EN 13889 and meets performance requirements of US Fed. Spec. RR-C-271 Type IVA Class 2,
Grade A

Finish: hot dipped galvanized

Temperature Range: -20°C up to +200°C

Certification: at no extra charges this product can be supplied with a works certificate, 3.1 material
certificate, manufacturer test certificate, EC Declaration of Conformity and all shackles starting from 2 t
can be supplied with DNV 2.7-1 certificate.

27
 PROJECT TMP301

Figure 13 Figure showing Shackles Catalogue

3.2.4 Wire Rope and Sling

Wire rope and sling is selected for load case I where maximum vertical force is applied. The selected
product is shown in Figure with yellow highlight. The wire rope has 38mm dia with steel core. The ropes
in 2 leg configuration with angle between 45-60 degree has capacity of 15 tons and when in single
configuration, the rope can take 21 tons load. This rope is safe to use for both load cases.

28
 PROJECT TMP301

3.2.5 Lifting Rack

The design and dimensions of lifting rack is made such that the bending stress in the lifting rack is
eliminated. Since the diameter of the lifting lug shackle is 19mm, as per standard, the diameter of the
hole should be 5% larger than the diameter of the shackle bolt, hence

drack dS 2 1.05 38 1.05 40mm

Figure 14 shows the dimensions of lifting rack proposed.

29
 PROJECT TMP301

Figure 14 Lifting Rack Dimensions

Distance from tangent of hole to the tangent of outer radius is set to 35mm. This is the area which will
provide resistance against bearing load.

Thickness of lifting rack is 25mm.

3.2.5.1 Bering Stress in Hole

Bearing stress in the hole will be determined against load case I in which larger force is applied on the
hole.

F Fw 115413
 Bearing  w   115.5MPa
AHole track d rack 25 40

Since

 Bearing  allowable

Hence lifting rack can withstand the given loading conditions for bearing stress.

3.2.5.2 Shear Stress in Lifting Rack

Permissible shear stress in the lifting rack is 0.6 times of allowable tensile stress. Hence

 allowable 0.6  allowable 0.6 127.5 76.5MPa

Shear stress in the lifting rack can be calculated by following relation

30
 PROJECT TMP301

Fw 115413
 Shear   66MPa
2 ledge track 2 35 25

Since

 Shear  allowable

Hence lifting rack can withstand the given loading conditions for shear stress.

3.2.5.3 Sleeve Plates

Since the thickness of the lifting rack is only 25mm while the bolt length which is going to be carrying
the load in shackle is 57mm, more than half of the area of the bolt will be un-utilized and this will
increase the bending load on the bolt. To optimize the material in the bolt, we cannot increase the
thickness of the whole lifting rack but we can add sleeves at the sides of the hole in such a way that at
least 75% of length of bolt is in contact with the lifting rack so that the stresses are distributed evenly
without creating any concentrated stressed regions. The plates added on the sides are 12mm thick
hence total thickness of the eye of lifting rack becomes 12+12+25=49mm

3.2.6 Lifting Lugs

The design and dimensions of lifting lug is made such that the bending stress in the lifting rack is
eliminated. Following figure shows the dimensions of lifting lug proposed. Since the diameter of the
lifting lug shackle is 19mm, as per standard, the diameter of the hole should be 5% larger than the
diameter of the shackle bolt, hence

dlug dS 2 1.05 19 1.05 20mm

Figure 15 shows the dimensions of lifting rack proposed.

31
 PROJECT TMP301

Figure 15 Lifting Lug Dimensions

Although we set the thickness of the lifting lug to be 25mm, it can be lower than that but due to the
fact that it is going to be welded to HEB320 profile which has larger thickness, so to keep the weld
quality intact and less heat affected zone, Thickness is kept 25mm.

Since there are 6 numbers of lifting lugs carrying the load, total of 15 tons load will be equally divided
so

Flug 2500 9.81 24525N

3.2.6.1 Bering Stress in Hole

Bearing stress in the hole will be determined against load case I in which larger force is applied on the
hole.

F F 24525
 Bearing  lug  lug  49.05MPa
AHole tlug dlug 25 20

Since

 Bearing  allowable

Hence lifting lug can withstand the given loading conditions for bearing stress.

3.2.6.2 Shear Stress in Lifting Lug

Permissible shear stress in the lifting lug is 0.6 times of allowable tensile stress. Hence

 allowable 0.6  allowable 0.6 127.5 76.5MPa

32
 PROJECT TMP301

Shear stress in the lifting lug can be calculated by following relation

Flug 24525
 Shear   32.8MPa
2 ledge tlug 2 15 25

Since

 Shear  allowable

Hence lifting lug can withstand the given loading conditions for shear stress.

3.2.7 Buckling of HEB320 Profile

The beam profile HEB320 must be tested for buckling. Buckling will be calculated for load case II where
bending moment is maximum. Input data for buckling calculation is as follows:

Fp 32700 N 32.7kN , Fwy 57084 N 57.08kN , w 1606 N / m 1.606kN / m,

I y 308.2 104 mm4 , A 16.1103 mm2 , I yy 1926 103 mm3 , iy 138.2mm, f y 355MPa

First we need to calculate the slenderness ratio of beam hence

l 10 2.085
  56.5
iy 0.138

Since slenderness ratio is less than 89 we can use tetmajer formula for buckling

 k 335 0.62  335 0.62 56.5 298MPa

Fk  A
 k  k  Fk  k
A k
298 16.1103
Fk  1599267 N
3

M max 122311.244 Nm 122311244 Nmm

M Buckling I y R e 1926 103 355 683.7 106 Nmm

By using the formula

Fwy 1.6 M max

 1
Fk M Buckling

57084 1.6 122311244

 0.322 1
1599267 683.7 106

33
 PROJECT TMP301

Hence the beam will not buckle against load along strong axis.

Similarly calculations are repeated for weak axis as follows:

First we need to calculate the slenderness ratio of beam hence

iy 75.7mm

l 10 2.085
  109
iy 0.0757

Since slenderness ratio is less than 89 we can use Euler’s formula for buckling

 2 E  2 2.1105
k  2  174.44MPa
 1092

Fk  A
 k  k  Fk  k
A k
174.44 16.1103
Fk  936204 N
3

Fwy
1
Fk

57084
0.061 1
936204

Hence beam profile is safe in buckling along weak axis.

3.2.8 Welding Safety Calculations

The welding is critical part of a lifting beam. An improper welding can cause catastrophic failure
resulting in loss of life and property.

Lifting beam has many critical welding areas, lifting racks are one of the critical areas to be welded on
top of the beam surface. Since the thickness of the throat of beam is 11.5mm, the thickness of weld is
kept 6mm (taken from the book "The construction elements, page 33, ISBN 82-585-0700-1").

Total weld length is 1070mm including both long sides and short sides of the lifting rack. Continuous
welding is used to avoid any leakage of moisture between the lifting rack and HEB320 profile and cause
internal damage to material.

Stress in weld joints are calculated as follows

34
 PROJECT TMP301

Fwy 81609
w   13.34MPa
Aweld 6 2 510

Fwy  13.34
 w w   s  9.43MPa
Aweld 2 2

F 81609
 w  wx  13.34MPa
Aweld 6 2 510

 iw   2w 3(2w  w2 )

 iw  9.432 3(9.432 13.342 ) 29.8MPa

Since allowable stress is 127.5 Mpa, hence welding is safe.

3.3 Dynamic loads and fatigue calculations

To take into account of fatigue, the calculations are done keeping in view the following parameters;

 Lifting is done 8 times a day.

 Load case 1 and load case 2 are used.
 A dynamic loading factor of 1.5 is used to accommodate any jerks or shocks during
loading/unloading.
 A fatigue factor of 3 is used to accommodate failures due to fractures.

First of all, the fatigue in the weld area around the lifting racks is calculated using following
approach.

3.3.1 Dynamic Loads

3.3.1.1 Load Case I

lweld 510mm, a 6mm, Fwy 81609 N

Fwy 81609
w   13.25MPa
2 a lweld 2 6 510

 13.25MPa
    s  9.38MPa
2 2

 w   2 2 0.2  w2  9.372 9.372 0.2 13.2472 14.5MPa

Taking into account the dynamic loading factor we get

35
 PROJECT TMP301

 w 14.5 1.5 21.78MPa

3.3.1.2 Load Case II

lweld 510mm, a 6mm, Fwy 57084 N

Fwy 57084
w   9.33MPa
2 a lweld 2 6 510

 9.33MPa
    s  6.6MPa
2 2

 w   2 2 0.2  w2  6.62 6.62 0.2 9.332 10.22MPa

Taking into account the dynamic loading factor we get

 w 10.22 1.5 15.33MPa

3.3.2 Fatigue Analysis

The fatigue analysis is based on the assumptions made in the start that is W3-curve from DNV standard
for fatigue analysis will be used; the loading cycle will be used as discussed above.

N 10loga  m

loga 10.970 , m 3

1 1

C    10.970
10
m 3
Breakpo int :  7   7  21MPa
10   10 

Since both the weld stresses are below the breakpoint of DNV standard curve breakpoint stress, hence
the welding selected for the lifting beam is sufficient to prevent fatigue failure.

DDF 3

n n  1
D  1  2 
N1 N 2  DDF

1
Life( days )  3 279460.34 days
 8 8 
  
9049076.67 25914541.31 

36
 PROJECT TMP301

3.3.2.1 Fatigue of Lifting Rack

By looking at the CAD model, we see that the fatigue failure will start at a plane 45 degrees to the lifting
beam loading plan. In CAD model, the geometry is sliced at 45 degree plane and exposed area is
calculated from the geometrical measure tool which is 6730mm2 shown in green region.

Cycle will be used as discussed above.

N 10loga  m

loga 10.970 , m 3

1 1

C m 
1010.970 
3
Breakpo int :  7   7  21MPa
10   10 

The dynamic loading factor of 1.5 is multiplied with the force to get the revised breakpoint stress value.

Load Case I

F 81609
Δ 1  w 1.5  1.5 18.2MPA 
As 6730

Load Case II

F 57084
Δ 2  w 1.5  1.5 12.7 MPA 
As 6730

Since both the stress values are less than the breakpoint stress value in the DNV SN curve, hence the
design is safe for fatigue failure.

3.3.2.2 Fatigue in Lifting rack Weld

The Figure 16 shows the weld spot in the base of lifting rack. The red point shows the point of fatigue
failure. The distance between the red point and the beam surface is given by Xu

37
 PROJECT TMP301

Figure 16 Lifting Rack Fatigue in Weld

M F 
Δ wf 1.5  u  wx 
I A 
y 

X u 1200 55 6 2 126348mm

Load Case I

X2
M u1 Fwy X u 850 w 103  u Fp X u
2

1263.482
M u1 81609 1263.48 850 1606 10  3
49050 1263.48
2

M u 29512286 Nmm

29512286 81609 
Δ wf 1.5  3
 16.8MPa
1680 10 16.1103 

Load Case II

X u2
Mu2 Fwy X u 850 w 10  3

1263.482
M u 2 57084 1263.48 850 1606 103 
2

M u 2 22320933Nmm

22320933Nmm 57084,39 
Δ wf 1.5  3
 24.46MPa
 1680 10 16.1103 

SN curve from Table A.7 of the standard indicates that as the length of the lifting rack is more than
300mm, F3 curve will be selected, this curves can be used to evaluate life cycle of the lifting rack weld.

38
 PROJECT TMP301

N 10loga  m

loga 11546 , m 3

1 1

C m 
1011,546 
3
Breakpoint :  7   7  32,8MPa
10   10 

Since the cyclic stresses are below the breakpoint stress value at curve, the design is safe in fatigue.

3.3.2.3 Fatigue of the Lifting Beam Material

A dynamic loading factor of 1.5 is multiplied to the cyclic stress values calculated in previous sections
which gives us revised cyclic loads as follows;

Δ n1 49.12 1.5 73.7MPa

Δ n 2 76.6 1.5 114.96MPa

By selecting the SN curve from table A-7 case 9 in the DNV standard, Curve F is selected which gives
following values;

N 10loga  m

loga 11.855 , m 3

N1 7.1611011 73.7003 1788947.25

N2 7.1611011 114.9533 471453.7

DDF 3

n n  1
D  1  2 
N1 N 2  DDF

1
D 3 15546.76 days 425 year
 8 8 
  
1788947.27 471453.72 

39
 PROJECT TMP301

4 FEM ANALYSIS

Finite Element Analysis (FEA) is computer software based technique to calculate the strength and
possible failure in engineering materials. Stresses, deflection, vibrations, buckling and many other
phenomenon can be predicted using FEA techniques. The advancement in technology and low cost
computers have made it possible for low profile companies and students to use FEA software. In the
finite element method, a structure is broken down into many small simple blocks or elements and the
analyzed by applying the boundary conditions in the form of loads, forces, displacement constraints and
mechanism connection between different parts and assemblies. An individual element can be defined
using a simpler set of equations. Just as the set of elements would be joined together to build the
whole structure, the equations from all set of elements are joined to form a large set of equations
which represent the behavior of whole system to the external boundary conditions. The computer can
solve this large set of simultaneous equations by using numerical techniques. From the solution, the
computer extracts the results of individual elements and then integrates them to present the overall
stresses, deflection and other parameters as results.

4.1 Modelling and supports

Finite element analysis was performed on the lifting beam in ANSYS, where CAD geometry from Creo
parametric is imported in ANSYS. Effort is made to mesh the model using Quad-elements to avoid any
analytical rigidity in structure.

FE model is shown in Figure 17

Figure 17 FEA Model of Lifting Beam

The weld joints are considered as bonded constraints. The loads applied are uniform and no factor of
safety is incorporated in the applied load.

40
 PROJECT TMP301

4.1.1 Elements and Sizing

HEX20 and Wedge elements were used for the FEM model of lifting beam, following graphs shows the
element properties. Medium sizing of elements was used with minimum edge length of 4mm.

Figure 18 Elements Quality Bar Graph

Figure 19 Elements Aspect Ratio Graph

41
 PROJECT TMP301

Figure 20 Elements Skewness Graph

4.1.2 Load Case I

Boundary conditions used in load case 1 are as per the definition of load case I as discussed previously.
The lifting racks are supported with Fixed Support constraints and a total vertical load of 15 tons
(divided equally among 6 lifting lugs) is applied. The loading conditions are shown in Figure

Figure 21 Boundary Conditions Load Case I

The results of stress, deflection are obtained by running the FEM model for solution. The obtained
results are shown below;

42
 PROJECT TMP301

Figure 22 Stress (Von-Mises) in lifting beam Load Case I

Figure 23 Stress (Von-Mises) in HEB320 Profile only Load Case I

43
 PROJECT TMP301

Figure 24 Deflection in Lifting Beam Load Case I

Figure 25 Fatigue Life (Days) Load Case I

4.1.3 Load Case II

Boundary conditions used in load case 2 are as per the definition of load case II as discussed previously.
The lifting racks are supported with Fixed Support constraints and a total vertical load of 10 tons
(divided equally among 6 lifting lugs) is applied. The loading conditions are shown in Figure

44
 PROJECT TMP301

Figure 26 Boundary Conditions Load Case II

The results of stress, deflection are obtained by running the FEM model for solution. The obtained
results are shown below;

Figure 27 Stress (Von-Mises) in lifting beam Load Case II

45
 PROJECT TMP301

Figure 28 Stress (Von-Mises) in HEB320 Profile only Load Case II

Figure 29 Deflection in Lifting Beam Load Case II

46
 PROJECT TMP301

Figure 30 Fatigue Life (Days) Load Case II

4.2 Comparison against Hand Calculations

Results obtained from FEA of lifting beam for both load cases are listed in following table. The relevant
results from hand calculations are also listed and a comparison is made.

Hand Calculations Results FEA Results

Load Case
Stress Deflection Stress Deflection
Not Not
15 tons 82.7MPa 3.46mm
calculated calculated
10 tons 67MPa 12.7mm 71.8MPa 8.36mm
Table 2 Comparison of Results
Since only worst case scenario for the stress when bending moment is maximum (Load Case I) was used
for hand calculations, we can see that the difference in calculated stress and from FEM analysis is
relatively small. Also the difference in the results is due to simplification of hand calculations and the
fact that no ribs and support structures (stiffeners) were considered during hand calculations.

5 CAD PRESENTATION (2D / 3D)

In this chapter, the CAD Modelling process, and 2D/3D drawings and illustrations for assembly and
fabrication of lifting beam will be discussed.

47
 PROJECT TMP301

5.1 CAD Modelling

Creo Parametric is a multi-platform CAD/CAM/CAE commercial Written in the C++ programming

language; Creo Parametric is the product of the PTC Corporation Ltd. Creo Parametric is the leading
solution for product success. It addresses all manufacturing organizations; from OEMs through their
supply chains, to small independent producers. Creo Parametric can be applied to a wide variety of
industries, from aerospace, and consumer goods. With the power and functional range to address the
complete product development process, Creo Parametric supports product engineering, from initial
specification to product-in-service, in a fully-integrated manner. It facilitates reuse of product design
knowledge and shortens development cycles.

5.2 Visualization 3D

Creo Parametric 2.0 was used for Modelling of Lifting beam and its components according to the design
calculations. The part and assembly Model illustrations are shown in figures below.

Figure 31 Lifting Beam HEB320 CAD Model

48
 PROJECT TMP301

Figure 32 Lifting Rack CAD Model

Figure 33 Lifting Lug CAD Model

49
 PROJECT TMP301

Figure 34 Sleeve CAD Model

Figure 35 Stiffener CAD Model

50
 PROJECT TMP301

Figure 36 Lifting Beam Assembly CAD Model

5.3 Construction drawings 2D

2D fabrication drawings have been created for all the parts with dimensional details provided on 2D
views and isometric views for illustrations. A preview of each part and assembly drawing is shown in
following figures, for detailed images, PDF files have been created depicting fully detailed drawings for
fabrication of lifting beam.

51
 PROJECT TMP301

Figure 37 2D Drawing of Lifting Lug

Figure 38 2D Drawing of Lifting Rack

52
 PROJECT TMP301

Figure 39 2D Drawing of HEB320 I Beam

Figure 40 2D Drawing Sleeve

53
 PROJECT TMP301

Figure 41 2D Drawing of Stiffener

Figure 42 2D Lifting Beam Assy Drawing (SHEET 1)

54
 PROJECT TMP301

Figure 432D Lifting Beam Assy Drawing (SHEET 2)

5.4 Workshop Directions

Lifting beam drawings have been created with all the necessary details for cutting, fabrication and
assembly. The lifting rack and lifting lugs are relatively difficult profiles to cut and hence a plasma
cutting machine which can be fed with DXF file or 2D CAD drawing file is recommended for cutting. CNC
water jet cutting can also be used for cutting difficult profiles. A 6G position qualified welder is required
for proper welding of the lifting beam Assy because the welding inside the beam is relatively difficult
and qualified/experienced welder can do it properly. The estimated weight of the lifting beam is also
mentioned in the CAD drawings. The tolerance standard has been mentioned in the 2D drawing files.

6 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

There are two major parts of this report which includes a complete design process for the selection of
lifting beam starting from setting design constraints, and operational requirements and verification of
the design by using software tools (FEM Analysis) against the given loading conditions. The problem
statement is divided into multiple phases which involve determination of axial forces, shear forces and
bending moments in the lifting beam profile for selected loading conditions, then using the worst case
scenario for selection of beam profile (HEB320) and dimensioning of lifting racks and lifting lugs. All the
functional and design requirements are met ensuring the feasibility of design using hand calculations.
The calculations for weld joints, and material failure were performed for all the critical parts in lifting

55
 PROJECT TMP301

beam. Standards were used to ensure the authenticity of the selected design for fatigue failure. The
beam profile is also selected from DIN HEB profile standard.

7 LITERATURE REFERENCES

[1] http://www.b2bmetal.eu/heb-sections-specification [HEB320 profile]

[2] Mechanics of Materials: An Introduction to Engineering Technology by Ghavami, Parviz ISBN: ISBN
978-3-319-07572-3

[3] http://www.safewaysling.com/files/102063551.pdf [shackles]

[4] http://www.liftingsafety.co.uk/product/wire-rope-slings-3373.html [Ropes]

[5] Mechanics of Materials: 8th Edition 8th Edition by James M. Gere & onooo . BBraB ISBN-13:
978-1111577735

[6]

56