Crane Project

Team 2— ENGR-Section 501/502

Team Members
Odai Elfeghih

Njoud Al-Kubaisi

Ali Al-Mhssin

Shouq Al-Musleh

Lab Instructor:

Dr. Michael Schuller

05/12/2021
 1

Abstract

The aim of this project was to use all the concepts covered throughout the semester to
build a stable crane. The requirement for the crane was to at least be able to lift a load
of 1-kg while being at least over 1 meter in height. The instructor gave out a sample of
the crane design which had a couple of flaws, so we decided to modify the design to
fulfill the requirements of this project. A crane was built using the PASCO structures set
with the help of the PASCO manual instructions to assemble a robust and stable crane
design. With the use of the concepts covered in this semester, such as Newton’s
Second Law, toque, and moments, we were able to construct a free body diagram to
calculate the maximum load we can put on the load arm as well as the maximum
counterweight which the crane could support. Once the crane was built, the maximum
load and maximum counterweight values were tested during the lab session with the
instructor using a special device to verify our theoretical calculated values with the
experimental values. The actual values we obtained differed slightly from those
calculated theoretically. This minor error could have resulted from the load arm string
being tightened very firmly to the crane's center, causing the counterweight arm to tilt
slightly, otherwise, the flaws in the experiment were determined to be the result of faulty
measurements or inaccuracy in the crane design.
 2

Table of Contents

Introduction………………………………………………………………………………..3

Theory……………………………………………………………………………………....4

Experimental Apparatus………………………………………………………………..8

Test Procedure…………………………………………………………………………...9

Results……………………………………………………………………………………..9

Discussion………………………………………………………………………………...10

Findings……………………………………………………………………………………11

Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………...12

References………………………………………………………………………………...12

Appendix…………………………………………………………………………………..12
 3

Introduction

As an engineer, you must be able to design and produce things. This requires
determining the design's basics and requirements. The engineer will need to take a few
steps to do this. This means completing the project within a given time frame and within
a set budget, as well as ensuring an excellent performance of the project's design and
providing a safe environment for all involved parties

The purpose of this project is to build a tower crane that can withstand a load of 1kg
with a height of 1m and to confirm theoretical predictions through experimental tests. A
crane is a mechanism that is used to move and transport heavier objects from one
place to another. Many buildings and skyscrapers that have been built use a crane to
move heavy equipment from one location to the other. As engineers, everything has to
be done correctly and efficiently to avoid injuries, deaths, and financial losses. As
mentioned through the ASME Code of Ethics, engineers are obligated to ensure the
safety of workers and civilians, while maintaining efficient and professional development
for clients’ use. Therefore, when calculating the minimum and maximum load of the
crane, engineers have to be cautious and confirm the safety of their design through
testing experimental procedures.

The crane was constructed using the PASCO construction set by putting the pieces
together and considering the free body diagram with all of the forces acting on it.
Another thing that had to be calculated from the crane prototype is the maximum and
minimum load and counterweight. This report will discuss the following things, first is the
introduction where the objectives of the experiment are stated. All the equations that
were used for the calculation will be in theory. The experimental apparatus is all the
equipment that was used during the experiment. The test procedure will explain the
 4

method briefly, the calculated and theoretical values will be in results. Last but not least,
the conclusion and the appendix with all the calculations and masses that were used.

Theory

When an object is in static equilibrium, it remains in the same position, where the sum of all
forces and moment is zero. For the constructed tower crane to maintain its state of static
equilibrium, the forces applied by all its components from all sides must cancel out. Hence, the
crane remains in its position on the ground, without tipping over to either side of the crane
arms.

Prior to the calculation procedure, the lengths and masses of the crane components must be
calculated using simple mathematics. Calculating the length of the wire on the tower crane
required the use of the Pythagorean Theorem:

2 2 2
𝑎 +𝑏 =𝑐

Newton’s Second Law states that the force is equal to the product of mass and acceleration.
Since the crane is in static equilibrium, the net force along the x and y directions must be equal
to zero, as stated in the following equation:

∑ 𝐹𝑥 = 0 (1)

∑ 𝐹𝑦 = 0 (2)

Since no forces are acting upon the crane in the x-direction, only the net vertical force equation
was utilized. Ensuring the stability of the crane requires applying the sum of moments and
equating the net moment to zero, as demonstrated by the following equation:

∑ 𝑀 = 0 (3)

Three cases were taken into consideration to predict the crane’s stability. When no weight is
applied, when counterweight is applied, and when counterweight is applied with a load. As
 5

displayed through the free-body diagram in figure 3, there are reaction forces (RA and RB)
released from the ground. According to Newton’s Third Law, for every action there is an equal
and opposite reaction. To predict the stability of the crane, the reaction forces (RA and RB) must
be determined using the calculated lengths and masses of the crane’s components.

No Weight Stability

The following is the net vertical force equation used in determining the reaction forces:

∑ 𝐹𝑦 = 𝑅𝐴 + 𝑅𝐵 − (𝑊𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 𝑎𝑟𝑚 + 𝑊𝑡𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟 + 𝑊𝑐𝑤𝑎)=0

Since both RA and RB are unknown variables, a second equation must be utilized to calculate
either one of the reaction forces. Evaluating the net torque from point RA canceled out RA and
allowed us to calculate the value of RB.

∑ 𝑀𝑅𝐴 = 0 = 𝑊 (𝑥1 + 𝑥2 + 𝑥𝑐𝑤𝑎) + 𝑊𝑡𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟(𝑥1)− 𝑊𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 𝑎𝑟𝑚(𝑥𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 𝑎𝑟𝑚) − 𝑅𝐵(𝑥1 + 𝑥2)

𝑐𝑤𝑎
 6

The values were plugged into the main equation, resulting in the following equation to calculate
RB:

(
𝑊𝑐𝑤𝑎 𝑥1+𝑥2+𝑥𝑐𝑤𝑎 +𝑊 ) 𝑡𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟
(𝑥1)−𝑊𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 𝑎𝑟𝑚(𝑥𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 𝑎𝑟𝑚)
𝑅𝐵 = 𝑥1+𝑥2

Rearranging and plugging in the values back in the net vertical forces’ equation allows for
evaluating the value of RB. It is vital to take into consideration the fact that in the scenario that
RA < 0 or RB < 0, the crane is unstable. One should keep note that the ground can only exert a
push force, not a pull force. In that case, the most efficient solution to stabilize the crane is to
either lengthen or shorten the load arm.

Stability With Counterweight

When considering the counterweight into the calculation, the reaction forces need to be
recalculated to predict the maximum counterweight the redesigned tower crane can handle
without tipping over. The calculation was taken at the limit of stability when RA = 0 N, which
would produce the maximum counterweight possible. The calculation of RB is demonstrated by:

( )
𝑊𝑐𝑤𝑎 𝑥1+𝑥2+𝑥𝑐𝑤𝑎 +𝑊
𝑡𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟
(𝑥1)−𝑊𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 𝑎𝑟𝑚(𝑥𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 𝑎𝑟𝑚)+𝑊𝑐𝑤(𝑥1+𝑥2+𝑥𝑐𝑤)
𝑅𝐵 = 𝑥1+𝑥2
 7

For the maximum counterweight:

(
𝑊𝑐𝑤𝑎 𝑥𝑐𝑤𝑎 +𝑊) 𝑡𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟
(𝑥𝑡𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟)+𝑊𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 𝑎𝑟𝑚(𝑥𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 𝑎𝑟𝑚)
𝑊𝑐𝑤 = 𝑥𝑐𝑤

Stability With Counterweight and Load

Similarly, the reaction forces are recalculated again to predict how stable the crane is once the
maximum load is hung from the load arm of the crane. The calculation was taken at the limit of
stability when RB = 0 N, which would produce the maximum load possible. The equation utilized
for evaluating RA is displayed by:

( )
𝑊𝑐𝑤𝑎 𝑥1+𝑥2+𝑥𝑐𝑤𝑎 +𝑊
𝑡𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟
(𝑥1)−𝑊𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 𝑎𝑟𝑚(𝑥𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 𝑎𝑟𝑚)+𝑊𝑐𝑤(𝑥1+𝑥2+𝑥𝑐𝑤)−𝑊𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑(𝑥𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑)
𝑅𝐵 = 𝑥1+𝑥2

For the maximum load:

 8

( )
𝑊𝑐𝑤𝑎 𝑥𝑐𝑤𝑎 +𝑊
𝑡𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟
(𝑥𝑡𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟)+𝑊𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 𝑎𝑟𝑚(𝑥𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 𝑎𝑟𝑚)+𝑊𝑐𝑤(𝑥𝑐𝑤)
𝑊𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 = 𝑥𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑

All predicted values obtained were analyzed and compared to the actual values obtained
through the strain gauge sensor in the lab. The percentage error was obtained by:

|𝑃𝑟𝑒𝑑𝑖𝑐𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑉𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒−𝐸𝑥𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑉𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒|

𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝐸𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟 = 𝑃𝑟𝑒𝑑𝑖𝑐𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑉𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒
×100

Experimental Apparatus

The following is the list of crane components that were used in building the tower crane
displayed on figure #.

- #5 Beam
- #4 Beam
- #3 Beam
- #2 Beam
- #1 Beam
- Short rod
- Long rod
- Flat connector
- Full round connector
- Half round connector
- Collett
- Tensioning clip
- Screw
- Pulley
- Cord
- Strain gauge
- Yellow string
-

In addition to the crane building components, there were several other instruments utilized to
facilitate the completion of the project. Screwdrivers were used on the screws to tighten the
yellow string on the crane. There were also several excel sheets created to store the obtained
values.
 9

Test Procedure

To find the maximum and minimum counterweight and load that the crane can withstand
without tipping, these steps had to be followed . A free body diagram of the re-designed
crane was drawn and the forces such as the reaction forces were labelled. A sheet with
all the lengths and masses of the beams and the building parts were given. This will
help us to find the lengths and weights of each part of the crane. The sum of forces and
moment was calculated and the theoretical values for the maximum and minimum
counterweight and load were found. Each person worked on a different part of the
crane. For example, one person worked on the arm load while the other worked on the
base and after that the parts were assembled. Splitting the tasks while building the
crane helps save time. The strings were then attached to lift the counterweight of the
load arm. Last but not least, the re-designed crane was then tested by a device to show
us the tipping point when adding the masses on the counterweight and arm load of the
crane. The professor told us to take pictures of the actual values, these actual values
then were compared with the theoretical values. A spreadsheet was then used to do the
calculations accurately and find the percentage error.

Results

All values obtained through the calculations were compiled into tables that display the
predicted and experimental values of the reaction forces, maximum counterweight, and
maximum load. Since the test procedure was fulfilled in three separate scenarios, the obtained
values were also recorded separately.

No Weight
At the point where no counterweight and no load were applied into the crane, the calculations
were obtained and recorded in table 1. In addition, the predicted values were placed in a
comparison with the experimental values obtained in the lab, using the strain gauge sensor.
 10

With Counterweight
As priorly mentioned, the second scenario that was considered is analyzing the maximum
counterweight that the tower crane can handle while maintaining its stability and not falling
over. The values obtained from calculations in this case were recorded in table 2 to be
compared to the experimental values.

With Counterweight and Load

The last scenario that was considered is how heavy is the load that the crane can handle while
carrying the counterweight and not tipping over. Table 3 illustrates the comparison between the
predicted maximum load and the experimental maximum load.

Discussion

Prior to discussing the results, note that the experimental procedure was faulty, since the strain
gauge sensor’s channels were plugged in oppositely, hence the negative values of the reaction
forces. Throughout the discussion, the negative values will be assumed as positive values due to
the strain gauge’s systematic error. In addition, the sensor displayed unexpectedly large
 11

numbers that multiplied the values by 10, which is another systematic error; therefore, the
experimental values were considered after a division by 10. The results were represented in
tables, making the results more understandable. Moreover, the tightening of the string on the
crane was too extreme, pulling the counterweight arm up, thus contributing to the inaccuracy
of the experimental data.
As it is shown in table 1 where no counterweight or load were applied, the predicted values of
the reaction forces were less than the experimental ones. The predicted value of the reaction
force at point a (Ra) was 26.1N and the experimental value was -228N, which was assumed as
22.8 due to systematic errors in the testing procedure. On the other hand, the reaction force at
point b (Rb) was 4N and the experimental was -1.4 N, assumed as 0.14 N.

Looking at table 2, the maximum counterweight that the crane can handle without bending can
be analyzed. The predicted value of 1.6 kg and the experimental value was slightly greater than
the predicted by 0.57%. Since the predicted reaction forces are inconsistent with the
experimental reaction forces, as displayed through the percentage error in Ra and Rb, one can
conclude that this stage of the experiment was also affected by errors that may be due to errors
in calculations or errors in the experimental procedure.

Lastly, the maximum load table 3 displays is slightly off. It appears that the built crane can
handle more load than predicted. Since the percentage error in the reaction forces slightly leans
towards the higher side, one can assume that this part of the experiment was also affected by
error priorly mentioned.

Findings

● The theoretical maximum counterweight that could be held without tipping the
crane was discovered to be 1.57 kg.
● It was found that the actual maximum counterweight capacity of the crane was
1.7 kg. As a result, the percentage error is approximately 7.65%.
● It was discovered that the crane theoretically can lift a maximum load of 1.28 kg
without tipping over when the counterweight mass is 1.57 kg, which met the
project's requirements.
● The actual maximum load that the crane can lift was discovered to be 1.45 Kg.
As a result, the percentage error is about 11.72%.
 12

Conclusion

● It was discovered that the crane can lift a maximum load of 1.28 kg
without tipping over when the counterweight mass is 1.57 kg, which meets
the project's requirements.
● Performing a redesign on the sample crane was a crucial part for building
a stable crane.
● Even though errors were made along the way, the results of this
experiment support our hypothesis.
● The concept of planning and construction is a fundamental part of
engineering; the skillset gained from carrying out the project, such as
teamwork and collaboration, and performing adjustments to the crane
design, are valuable assets that help shape us as future engineers.

References

American Society of Mechanical Engineers. (2009). Society policy ethics code of ethics of
engineers - ASME. Retrieved December 5, 2021, from
https://www.asme.org/wwwasmeorg/media/resourcefiles/aboutasme/get%20involved/a
dvocacy/policy-publications/p-15-7-ethics.pdf.

Top cranes for building skyscrapers. B2B Purchase. (2017, June 18). Retrieved December 5,
2021, from https://b2bpurchase.com/top-cranes-for-building-skyscrapers/.

Appendix A: Raw Data

13
14
15
 16

Appendix B: Calculations for Maximum Counterweight and Load

17
 18

Appendix C: Percentage Error Example Calculation

|1.7−1.6|
𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝐸𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟 = 1.6
×100 = 0. 57%