Buy BS EN CRANES – GENERAL DESIGN – PART 1: GENERAL PRINCIPLES AND REQUIREMENTS from SAI Global. Click here to find out how to access this document. BS EN Cranes – general design. General principles and requirements. Publication Year. BS EN Cranes. General design. General principles and requirements. standard by British-Adopted European Standard, 04/30/.
|Published (Last):||23 March 2006|
|PDF File Size:||19.24 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||16.67 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Search the history of over billion web pages on the Internet. When Parts 1, 2, 3. The start and finish of text introduced or altered by corrigendum is indicated in the text by tags ac acTags indicating changes to CEN text carry the number of the amendment. A list of organizations represented on this subcommittee can be obtained on request to its secretary.
This publication does not purport to include all the necessary provisions of a contract. Users are responsible for its correct application. Compliance with a British Standard does not of itself confer immunity from legal obligations. Summary of pages This document comprises a front cover, an inside front cover, the EN title page, pages 2 to 28, sn inside back cover and a back cover. The BSI copyright notice displayed in this document indicates when the document was last issued.
General principles and requirements Securite des appareils de levage a charge suspendue – Krane – Konstruktion allgemein – Teil 1: Allgemeine Conception generale – Partie 1: Up-to-date lists and bibliographical references concerning such national standards may be obtained on application to the Central Secretariat or to any CEN member. A version in any other language made by translation under the responsibility of a CEN member into its own language and notified to the Central Secretariat has the same status as the official versions.
This European Standard shall be given the status of 133001-1 national standard, either by publication of an identical text or by endorsement, at the latest by Juneand conflicting national standards shall be withdrawn at the latest by June Annex A is informative. Bw other parts are as follows: General Principles and requirements Part 2: Load actions Part 3.
Limit states and proof of competence of steel structures Part 3. 133001-1 states and proof of competence of rope reeving components Part 3. Limit states and proof of competence of machinery 3 Licensed Copy: This standard also establishes interfaces between the user purchaser and the designer, as well as between the designer and the component manufacturer, in order to form 13001- basis for selecting cranes and components. The machinery concerned and the gs to which hazards are covered are indicated in the scope of this standard.
When provisions of this type C standard are different from those, which are stated in type A or B standards, the provisions of this type C standard take precedence over the provisions of the other standards, for machines that have been designed and built according to the provisions of this type C standard.
Part 3 is only at pre-drafting stage; the use of Parts 1 and 2 is not conditional to the publication of Part 3. NOTE Specific requirements for particular types of crane are given in the appropriate European Standard for the particular crane type.
The following is a list of significant hazardous situations and hazardous events that could result in risks to persons during normal use and foreseeable misuse. Clause 4 of this standard is necessary to reduce or eliminate the risks associated with the following hazards: This European Standard is applicable to cranes which are manufactured after the date of approval by CEN of this standard and serves as reference base for the European Standards for particular crane types.
These normative references are cited at the appropriate places in the text and the publications are listed hereafter. For dated references, subsequent amendments to or revisions of any 4 Licensed Copy: For undated references the latest edition of the publication referred to applies including amendments. Basic terminology, methodology ISO EN ISO 1 21 Technical principles and specifications ISO The proof of competence according to EN shall be carried out by using the general principles and methods appropriate for this purpose and corresponding with the recognised state of the art in crane design.
Alternatively, advanced and recognised theoretical or experimental methods may be 13001-1 in general, provided that they conform to the principles of this standard.
Hazards can occur eb extreme values of load effects or their histories exceed the corresponding limit states. To prevent these hazards with a margin of safety, it shall be shown that the calculated extreme values of load effects from all loads acting simultaneously on a crane and multiplied with an adequate partial safety coefficient, as well as the estimated 13001-1 of load effects, do not exceed their corresponding limit states at any critical point of the crane.
For this purpose the limit state method, and where applicable the allowable stress method, is used in accordance with international and European design codes.
BS EN 13001-1:2015
The analysis of load actions from individual events or representative use of a crane representative load histories is required to reflect realistic unfavourable operational conditions and sequences of actions of the crane. Figure 1 illustrates the general layout of a proof calculation for cranes.
These variations, if calculated in conformity with the agreed service conditions, are the base for estimating the histories of load effects e.
For cranes or crane configurations where all 113001-1 loads from different drives acting simultaneously do not affect each other because they are acting at right angles to each other i.
In cases where the loads from simultaneous actions of different drives affect each other dependent, non-orthogonalthis shall be taken into account. A nominal stress is a stress calculated in accordance with simple elastic strength of materials theory, excluding local stress concentration effects.
BS EN – Cranes. General design. General principles and requirements (British Standard)
Static equivalent loads are given in EN 133001-1 These static equivalent loads are considered as deterministic actions, which have been adjusted in such a way that they represent load actions during the use of the crane from the actions or circumstances under consideration. The limit state method see 4. If a different level of safety is required 113001-1 some instance, a risk factor y n may be agreed upon and applied.
Such superimpositions are called load combinations. Basic load combinations are given in EN When establishing the load combinations, consideration shall be given to the use of the crane, taking into account its control systems, its normative instructions for use, and any other inherent conditions, where they relate to the specific aim of the proof of competence. Magnitude, position and direction of all ej which act simultaneously in the sense of a load combination, shall be chosen in such a way that extreme load effects occur in the component or design detail under consideration.
Consequently, in order to establish the extreme stresses in all the design critical points, several loading events e crane configurations shall be studied within the same load combination, e.
The upper and lower extreme values 130011- the load effectsin terms of inner forces or nominal stresses, shall be used for a static proof calculation to avoid the hazards described in the scope. In combination with the agreed service conditions and the kinematic properties of 13010-1 crane or its parts, these values limit the histories of inner forces b nominal stresses for the proof of fatigue strength.
For the proof of fatigue strength, the number and magnitude of significant stress cycles shall be specified. There is a distinction between ultimate limit states and serviceability limit states as follows: For the sn that the ultimate limit states are not exceeded, the following proofs shall be established: For the verification that the serviceability limit states are not exceeded, the following aspects shall be considered, and a proof be established where appropriate: For all crane systems, the limit state method is applicable without any restriction.
When agreed upon Fj shall also be multiplied by an appropriate risk coefficient y n. The result y n -Fj shall be used to determine the resulting load effects S ki. The resulting design stress o, shall be compared with the limit design stress lim o.
For the proof of rigid body stability it shall be shown that under the combined action of the loads multiplied by their ba safety factors no rigid body movement occurs. All supports, where given limits are exceeded, i.
A flow chart illustrating the limit state method for the proof calculation based on stresses is shown in Figure 2. For the proof based on forces, moments, deflections the limit state method shall be applied by analogy. Figure 2 — Typical flow chart of the limit state method 4.
The allowable stress method can also be used for portions of MDC2 systems that act in the same manner as a 113001-1 MDC1 system. The allowable stress method is a special case of the limit state method, where the partial safety factors are given the same value, which combined with the resistance coefficient, forms an overall safety factor y f.
Because of its special character, be allowable stress method is only reliable in specific cases. Individual specified loads f, enn be calculated and amplified where necessary using the factors fa and shall be combined according to the load combinations under consideration.
The combined load Fshall be used to determine the resulting load effects Sk, i.
For proof that yielding and elastic instability do not occur, the nominal stress J u due to the action of the load effects on a particular element or component shall be calculated and combined with any stresses Y u resulting from local effects. The resulting stress J, shall be compared with the allowable stress adm o.
A flow chart illustrating the allowable stress method is shown in Figure 3. Figure 3 — Typical flow chart of the allowable stress method 4. Service conditions are considered in a general way, independent of the type of crane and the way it is driven.
The service conditions are determined by the following parameters: When the classified ranges of parameters are used, the design shall be based on the maximum values of the parameters within the specified classes.
Use of an intermediate value for a parameter is permissible, but in that case this design value shall be determined and marked instead of the class. A task r can be characterised by a specific combination of crane configuration and sequence of intended movements. The range of total numbers of working cycles C is classified in Table 2.
The total number of such operations during the useful life shall be specified.
The total number of working cycles of a crane during its useful life can be separated into the numbers of working cycles corresponding to several typical tasks. The relative number of working cycles a r for each task r is given by the expression a. C is the total number of working cycles during the useful life of the crane; C r is the number of working cycles of task r. The above given parameters are illustrated in Figure 4. Key a working space 1 b working space 2 Figure 4 — Service frequencies n ri and during task r in the working spaces 1 and 2, average linear displacement in the direction of movement of the drive under consideration Working movements within one working space shall be considered as a separate task.
The average displacement X should be estimated from the average displacements T r for all tasks r and the corresponding relative number of working cycles a r as follows: If there are significant differences in the displacements with different load levels, e.
The average linear index lin or angular index ang displacement X is classified in Table 3. The load spectrum factor kQ r for each task r is determined from kQr where: Where details concerning the numbers of working cycles and the masses of the particular net loads to be handled are not known, an appropriate relative frequency shall be agreed between the user, manufacturer and designer for each task r. Table 4 shows the classes Q of load spectrum factors kQ.
This is because for the same load spectrum factor, different frequencies of the net loads can produce different fatigue effects at a particular location. The average number of accelerations p of the drive under consideration is classified in Table 5 and illustrated in Figure 5.