Algorithm Crane Selection
Algorithm Crane Selection
net/publication/273432695
CITATIONS READS
16 2,613
5 authors, including:
Di Wu Yuanshan Lin
Shanghai Jiao Tong University 9 PUBLICATIONS 52 CITATIONS
33 PUBLICATIONS 140 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE
Xin Wang
Ocean University of China
38 PUBLICATIONS 89 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Yuanshan Lin on 22 May 2015.
Abstract: Lifting capacity charts are tabulated and provided to operators and practitioners by mobile crane manufacturers. These charts
are structured based on predetermined crane configurations, which consist of boom/jib length, lifting radius, main boom angle to ground,
and jib angle to ground or its offset to its main boom centerline. It is a tedious job that lifting planners select cranes for construction
projects based on a large number of lifting capacity charts. This paper presents a newly developed algorithm for selecting mobile cranes
on construction sites, which takes into account the lifting capacity, the geometrical characteristics of the crane, the dimensions of
equipments and riggings, and the ground bearing pressure. The algorithm is incorporated into a three-dimensional 共3D兲 computer-aided
system that integrates crane selection module, crane modeling module, 3D-simulation module, 3D computer-aided design modeling
module, rigging calculation module, and data management module. At last, a case is represented in order to demonstrate the use of the
developed algorithm and to illustrate its essential features.
DOI: 10.1061/共ASCE兲CP.1943-5487.0000065
CE Database subject headings: Cranes; Lifting; Pressure; Algorithms.
Author keywords: Crane selection; Heavy lift; Ground bearing pressure; Mobile crane; CAD.
Downloaded 16 Nov 2011 to 202.118.67.103. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit http://www.ascelibrary.org
cording to lift capacity setting retrieved from lift capacity data-
base together with some parameters from the rigging database,
the algorithm calculates the rated lifting height, working radius,
and lifting weight and checks if they meet requirements from an
input. Then, the clearance calculation fetches crane dimensions
and equipment dimensions from a crane geometry database, cal-
culates the clearance between boom/jib and equipment, and
checks if it is greater than the allowable clearance. Finally, the
ground bearing pressure calculation unit calculates the overall
center of gravity of the crane and the equipment and the ground
bearing pressure of the crane and checks if the pressure is less
than ground support capacity. If one lift capacity setting passes
the three tests, then a feasible crane configuration comes out. In a
word, based on the lifting capacity, dimensions of crane, equip-
ment, and rigging, the algorithm can retrieve from databases to
determine all technically feasible lift settings, which satisfy all
Fig. 1. System structure of the proposed algorithm
specified lifting capacity, clearances between boom/jib, and the
equipment and ground bearing pressure. Moreover, all technically
feasible lift settings are listed on the output interface “crane con-
puts of crane modeling, lifting simulation, and lift plan genera- figurations” and can be sorted by lift capacity, radius, or boom
tion. This paper focuses primarily on the selection module and its length. If all cranes in the database do not satisfy the specified
algorithm to support an efficient search for the most suitable lifting capacity, clearances boom or jib to the equipment, and
crane configurations and their associated lift settings. Detailed ground bearing pressure, then no crane configuration comes out
discussions on the approach and crane selection module devel- according to the user inputs. At the moment, the user is encour-
oped in 3D lifting simulation system are provided in the next aged to change his/her inputs or import more other crane data to
section. the database. The detailed calculation of the proposed algorithm is
presented in later section.
Downloaded 16 Nov 2011 to 202.118.67.103. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit http://www.ascelibrary.org
Fig. 3. Gross lifting weights
Lifting Height
As another important factor affecting the lift capacity, lifting
height is calculated under different boom/jib combinations. There
are many types of boom/jib combinations in terms of structure for
lattice boom crane, mainly including main boom, main boom with
fixed jib, and main boom with luffing jib configuration. Detailed
calculations of lifting height for every configuration are elabo-
rated as follows.
Downloaded 16 Nov 2011 to 202.118.67.103. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit http://www.ascelibrary.org
D3
R3
(X, Y) R1
(0, 0)
R
Fig. 4. Simplified structure of main boom configuration
Fig. 6. Simplified structure of main boom with luffing jib configu-
ration
H = H1 + Y 共9兲
Main Boom with Luffing Jib
where D2 and L2 represent the vertical offset of fixed jib sheave Like the configuration of a main boom with the fixed jib, a jib
and the fixed jib length, respectively, which are from the database. 共luffing jib兲 is mounted to the top of the main boom to improve
The representations of other symbols are the same as above. the lifting height and working radius. The difference is that the
angle between the main boom and the jib is changeable by rotat-
ing the jib around jib foot point. The lifting sheave is fixed on the
top of luffing jib, where there are some offsets to centerline of jib.
Its simplified structure for lifting height calculation is shown in
Fig. 6
R1 = L1 ⫻ cos ␣ 共10兲
H1 = L1 ⫻ sin ␣ 共11兲
R3 = R − X − R1 共12兲
H = Y + H1 + H3 共14兲
where ␣ = main boom angle from the database; L3 = luffing jib
length from the database; and D3 = vertical offset of the luffing jib
sheave from the database. Other symbols are the same as above.
The rate lifting height must satisfy Eq. 共16兲
H⬘ = Hob + HL + HL2H + HLMT 共15兲
H ⱖ H⬘ 共16兲
where Hob = distance from equipment bottom to ground when
equipment over the highest obstacle from the input interface;
HL = distance from lugs to bottom of equipment from the equip-
ment file; HL2H = vertical distance from lugs to hook from the
Fig. 5. Simplified structure of main boom with fixed jib configura- input interface; and HLMT = limit height from hook to lifting
tion sheave from the database.
Downloaded 16 Nov 2011 to 202.118.67.103. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit http://www.ascelibrary.org
Fig. 7. Calculation of clearance under main boom configuration
冉 冊
ments in real lifts, one of the methods for calculating the distance
between the boom/jib and the equipment is to calculate the mini- S1 + C⬘
tan ␣ ⫻ x − y − tan ␣ ⫻ X + +Y=0 共17兲
mum distance between meshes of boom/jib and equipment in sin ␣
冉 冊
three dimensions. This method is very accurate, but it needs to
construct 3D models of the boom/jib and the equipment before S1 + C⬘
tan ␣ ⫻ x1 − y 1 − tan ␣ ⫻ X + +Y
calculation and has high computational complexity. This method sin ␣
d= ⱖ 0 共18兲
is an inappropriate approach in the phase of a crane selection. 冑tan2 ␣ + 1
Fortunately, the boom/jib and the equipment are coplanar when
the equipment is lifted to the highest position, that is, when the where S1 = one-half height of the main boom, which is from the
most possible intersection occurs. Therefore, in the proposed al- database; d = distance from the point Q to the line Lc; x1 = x0; y 1
gorithm, first, the most possible intersection point between lifting = y 0 + ⌬H; and ⌬H = change of lifting height.
equipment and boom/jib can be calculated according to the infor-
mation of the equipment. Then, the calculation of the potential
Main Boom with Jib Configuration
intersection point to the boom/jib is carried out in two dimen-
sions. If the potential intersection point is underneath the boom/ As shown in Fig. 8, under the condition of a main boom with a jib
jib, then the crane configuration will pass the test; otherwise, it configuration, the given boom/jib angle, and the equipment, sup-
will not. pose the point P is the potential intersection point during the
lifting, and the point Q共x1 , y 1兲 is the highest point that P can
reach during the lifting. Determining if the clearance of the equip-
Main Boom Configuration
ment to the main boom is enough is equal to determining if the
As shown in Fig. 7, suppose that under the main boom configu- distances of the point Q to the line Lc1 and Lc2 are positive.
ration, given the main boom angle and the equipment, point P is Given the minimum clearance allowed C, the expressions of lines
the potential intersection point during the lifting, and the point Lc1 and Lc2 are Eqs. 共19兲 and 共20兲. The technically feasible crane
Q共x1 , y 1兲 is the highest point that P can reach during the lifting. configurations must satisfy Eqs. 共21兲 and 共22兲
tan ␣ ⫻ x − y − tan ␣ ⫻ X + 冉 S1 + C⬘
sin ␣
冊
+Y=0 共19兲
Downloaded 16 Nov 2011 to 202.118.67.103. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit http://www.ascelibrary.org
冉
tan  ⫻ x − y − tan  ⫻ X + L1 ⫻ cos ␣ +
S2 + C⬘
sin 
冊
+ Y + L1 ⫻ sin ␣ = 0 共20兲
d1 =
tan ␣ ⫻ x1 − y 1 − tan ␣ ⫻ X + 冉 S1 + C⬘
sin ␣
+Y 冊 ⱖ0 共21兲
冑tan2 ␣ + 1
d2 =
冉
tan  ⫻ x1 − y 1 − tan  ⫻ X + L1 ⫻ cos ␣ +
S2 + C⬘
sin 
冊
+ Y + L1 ⫻ sin ␣
ⱖ0 共22兲
冑tan2  + 1
where  = jib angle from the database; S2 = one-half height of jib = offset of the ith part in direction of crawler, which is the other
boom from the database; and d2 = distance between the point Q component of the whole gravity center of crane on the ground.
and the line Lc2. Center of gravity for each part can be calculated according to
current slewing angle, boom and jib angle to ground, and the data
of each part in the center of gravity database.
Step 3: Verify Ground Bearing Pressure In the crane selection, the ground bearing pressure must satisfy
Eqs. 共27兲 and 共28兲
The vertical load of one unit ground area is called ground bearing
GP = max关max共PIx兲,max共PIIx 兲兴 共27兲
pressure. The diagram of ground bearing pressure for a crawler
crane is shown in Fig. 9, and the ground bearing pressure is
GP ⱕ GP⬘ 共28兲
calculated as follows:
1. When 兩e兩 ⬍ L / 6
PIx =
Gg
2bL
1+冉2w
B
冊冉1+
12ex
L2
冊 Case Study
冉 冊冉 冊
Actual Case
Gg 2w 12ex
PIIx = 1− 1+ 共23兲 The proposed algorithm was integrated into a computer-aided de-
2bL B L2
sign system called 3D lifting simulation system, which has been
2. When 兩e兩 ⬎ L / 6 applied by Sinopec. To illustrate its effectiveness and usability, an
冉 冊
actual case is presented. The case here involves the installation of
Gg 2w
冉 冊
PIx = 2 1+ 共L − 3兩e兩 + 兩x兩兲 atmospheric tower of Refinery and Ethylene Project in the east of
L B Quanzhou, Fujian, China. The lifting equipment weighs 392 t and
9b − 兩e兩
2 has a diameter and a height of 6.85 and 54.4 m, respectively. The
equipment is to be lifted from staging A to targeted Location B
Gg
冉 2w
冊 which is 6.6 m high, as shown in Figs. 10 and 11. The most
冉 冊
PIIx = 2 1− 共L − 3兩e兩 + 兩x兩兲 共24兲 suitable crane configuration needs to be selected.
L B
9b − 兩e兩 Before using the selection module, the weight and the key
2 dimensions of lifting equipment are entered first, which limits the
The variables in Fig. 9 and Eqs. 共23兲 and 共24兲 are listed in
Table 1.
The whole gravity center of crane on the ground is calculated
as Eqs. 共25兲 and 共26兲
b
兺i Giei
e= 共25兲
兺i Gi
w
B
兺i Giwi
w= 共26兲
兺i Gi
where Gi = ith part weight from the database; wi = offset of the ith
part perpendicular to direction of crawler, which is one compo-
nent of the whole gravity center of crane on the ground; and ei Fig. 9. Diagram of ground bearing pressure for crawlers
Downloaded 16 Nov 2011 to 202.118.67.103. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit http://www.ascelibrary.org
Table 1. Definitions of Variables in Fig. 9 and Eqs. 共23兲 and 共24兲
Type Variables Representation From
Parameters retrieved from the database L The length of the region where crawler is pressed Geometry database
b The width of crawler Geometry database
B The distance between the two crawlers Geometry database
Temporary variables PxI The ground bearing pressure on x for the I crawler Calculation
PxII The ground bearing pressure on x for the II crawler Calculation
Gg The total resultant force consisting of the whole weight of Calculation
crane and the vertical load of equipment
w The offset perpendicular to direction of crawler, which is one Calculation
component of the whole gravity center of crane on the
ground
e The offset in direction of crawler, which is the other Calculation
component of the whole gravity center of crane on the
ground
search for the rigging type and size. The user is provided with an crane type of Demag CC8800, the boom/jib combination of main
option to select the rigging equipment from a list stored in the boom with superlift, a main boom length of 90 m, a radius of 18
rigging database or alternatively to enter the height and weight of m, a counterweight of 280 t, a center weight of 100 t, a super-
a suitable rigging of his/her choice. In addition, based on the size counter weight of 0 t, the lift capacity of 414 t, a supermast length
and weight of the lift under consideration, the developed system of 42 m, etc. Fig. 14 tells us that the highlighted configuration has
generates default values for the rigging weight and height. The the least rental cost option for its simple combination, a shortest
total lifting height, position height, working radius, total lifting
boom length, and no supercounter weight. This crane configura-
weight, ground pressure, and clearance between the boom/jib and
tion has the lifting height of 93.5 m, clearance between boom and
the equipment are entered as shown in Figs. 12 and 13. The total
lifting height and the total lifting weight have the default values the equipment of 0.58 m, and ground bearing pressure of 0.68
according to the rigging and equipment data and they can be MPa. The selected crane configuration has been successfully em-
modified by user. After pressing the “OK” button, all technically ployed in the real lifting and performed very well.
feasible crane configurations are listed on the output window as
shown in Fig. 14. However, it is quite probable that no configu-
ration comes out according to the user inputs if no crane configu-
ration satisfies all equations. If so, we may modify our inputs or
import other cranes data to the database.
In the actual case, 89 different technically feasible crane con-
figurations can be found. These configurations may be ordered by
lift capacity and length of main boom or working radius. The
highlighted configuration in Fig. 13 was selected, which has the
A: Staging
location
B: Targeted
location
Fig. 10. Planform view of the actual case Fig. 11. Elevation view of the actual case
Downloaded 16 Nov 2011 to 202.118.67.103. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit http://www.ascelibrary.org
Fig. 12. Basic requirements of the job entered interface
Downloaded 16 Nov 2011 to 202.118.67.103. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit http://www.ascelibrary.org
Table 3. Results of the Actual Case and Hypothetical Scenarios
Number of suitable
Cases crane configurations Best crane configuration
Actual case 89 Combination of main boom and superlift; main boom 90 m, radius 18 m, capacity 414 t, supermast 42 m,
counterweight 280 t, center weight 100 t, supercounter weight 0 t
Scenario 1 87 Supercounter weight 100 t with radius 22 m, the others same as actual case
Scenario 2 85 Radius 20 m, capacity 468 t, supercounter weight 100 t with radius 19 m, the others same as actual case
Scenario 3 85 Main boom 96 m, radius 20 m, capacity 466 t, supercounter weight 100 t with radius 19 m, the others same as
actual case
Scenario 4 80 Main boom 96 m, capacity 412, the others same as actual case
grates equipment and environment drawing, rigging selection and Hanna, A. S. 共1994兲. “Selectcrane: An expert system for optimum crane
calculation, crane selection, crane modeling, lifting simulation, selection.” Proc., 1st Int. Congress on Computing in Civil Engineer-
and lift plan generation. Some parameters of equipment and en- ing, 958–963.
vironment drawing and rigging selection and calculation module, Hanna, A. S., and Lotfallah, W. B. 共1999兲. “A fuzzy logic approach to the
such as dimension of equipment, rigging attachments weigh, etc., selection of cranes.” Autom. Constr., 8共5兲, 597–608.
are the inputs of crane selection algorithm, and the outputs of the Hornaday, W. C., Haas, C. T., O’Connor, J. T., and Wen, J. 共1993兲.
proposed algorithm are the inputs of crane modeling, lifting simu- “Computer-aided planning for heavy lifts.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage.,
lation, and lift plan generation. Finally, a case is presented to 119共3兲, 498–515.
demonstrate the effectiveness, usability, and accuracy of the de- Kang, S. C., and Miranda, E. 共2004兲. “Automated simulation of the erec-
veloped algorithm. tion activities in virtual construction.” Proc., 10th Int. Conf. on Com-
puting in Civil and Building Engineering, Weimar, Germany.
Lin, K. L., and Haas, C. T. 共1996兲. “Multiple heavy lifts optimization.” J.
Constr. Eng. Manage., 122共4兲, 354–362.
References
Mahalingam, A., Nair, H. S., and Varghese, K. 共2000兲. “A computer-
aided heavy lift planning model.” Proc., 8th Int. Conf. on Computing
Abraham, W. 共1990兲. “Expert systems for crane selection.” Constr. Man-
in Civil and Building Engineering, ASCE, Reston, Va., 996–1003.
age. Econom., 8, 179–190.
Al-Hussein, M. 共1999兲. “An integrated system for crane selection and Moselhi, O., Alkass, S., and Al-Hussein, M. 共2004兲. “Innovative 3D-
utilization.” Ph.D. thesis, Dept. of Building Civil and Environmental modelling for selecting and locating mobile cranes.” Eng., Constr.,
Engineering, Concordia Univ., Montreal. Archit. Manage., 11共5兲, 373–380.
Al-Hussein, M., Alkass, S., and Moselhi, O. 共2001兲. “An algorithm for Reddy, S. D., Varghese, K., and Srinivasan, N. 共2007兲.“A computer-aided
mobile crane selection and location on construction sites.” Constr. system for planning and 3D-visualization of multiple heavy lifts op-
Innovation, 1共2兲, 92–105. erations.” Proc., 24th Int. Symp. on Automation and Robotics in Con-
Al-Hussein, M., Alkass, S., and Moselhi, O. 共2005兲. “Optimization algo- struction (ISARC 2007).
rithm for selection and on site location of mobile cranes.” J. Constr. Sawhney, A., and Mund, A. 共2001兲. “IntelliCranes: An integrated crane
Eng. Manage., 131共5兲, 579–590. type and model selection system.” Constr. Manage. Econom., 19共2兲,
Al-Hussein, M., Muhammad, A. N., Haitao, Y., and Kim, H.共2006兲. “In- 227–237.
tegrating 3D visualization and simulation for tower crane operations Sawhney, A., and Mund, A. 共2002兲. “Adaptive probabilistic neural
on construction sites.” Autom. Constr., 15, 554–562. network-based crane type selection system.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage.,
Dharwadkar, P. V., Varghese, K., O’Connor, J. T., and Gatton, T. M. 128共3兲, 265–273.
共1994兲. “Graphical visualization for planning heavy lifts.” Proc., 3rd Tantisevi, K., and Akinci, B. 共2008兲. “Simulation-based identification of
Congress on Computing in Civil Engineering, K. Khozeimeh, ed., possible locations for mobile cranes on construction sites.” J. Comput.
ASCE, New York, 759–766. Civ. Eng., 22共1兲, 21–30.
Haas, C. T., and Lin, K. L. 共1995兲. “An interactive database system with Varghese, K., Dharwadkar, P., Wolfhope, J., and James, T. O. 共1997兲. “A
graphical linkage for computer aided heavy lift planning.” Automation heavy lift planning system for crane lifts.” Microcomput. Civ. Eng.,
and Robotics in Construction, 12, 313–324. 12, 31–42.
Hammad, A., Wang, H., Zhang, C., and Al-Hussein, M.. 共2006兲. “Visu- Zhang, P., Harris, F. C., Olomolaiye, P. O., and Holt, G. D. 共1999兲. “Lo-
alizing crane selection and operation in virtual environment.” Proc., cation optimization for a group of tower cranes.” J. Constr. Eng. Man-
6th Int. Conf. on Construction Applications of Virtual Reality. age., 125共2兲, 115–122.
View publication stats Downloaded 16 Nov 2011 to 202.118.67.103. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit http://www.ascelibrary.org