MSc OIL AND GAS STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING – EG5098 - Brownfield Engineering

Table of Contents

4.0 LIFTING WITH STRUCTURAL STEELWORK 2

4.1 INTRODUCTION 2
4.2 GENERAL INFORMATION 3
4.3 STEELWORK ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN 5
4.3.1 RUNWAY BEAMS 5
4.3.2 CERTIFICATION OF EXISTING STEELWORK 8
4.4 RUNWAY BEAM DESIGN EXAMPLE 13
4.5 CERTIFICATION OF EXISTING STEELWORK – EXAMPLE 1 VERTICAL LIFT 22
4.6 CERTIFICATION OF EXISTING STEELWORK – EXAMPLE 2 CROSS HAUL 24
4.7 REFERENCE MATERIAL 27

Page 1
 MSc OIL AND GAS STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING – EG5098 - Brownfield Engineering

4.0 Lifting with Structural Steelwork

4.0 LIFTING WITH STRUCTURAL STEELWORK 2

4.1 INTRODUCTION 2
4.2 GENERAL INFORMATION 2
4.3 STEELWORK ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN 5
4.3.1 RUNWAY BEAMS 5
4.3.2 CERTIFICATION OF EXISTING STEELWORK 8
4.4 RUNWAY BEAM DESIGN EXAMPLE 13
4.5 CERTIFICATION OF EXISTING STEELWORK – EXAMPLE 1 VERTICAL LIFT 22
4.6 CERTIFICATION OF EXISTING STEELWORK – EXAMPLE 2 CROSS HAUL 24
4.7 REFERENCE MATERIAL 27

4.1 Introduction

Lifting operations, and installation works, form an extremely important part of Brownfield Structural
Engineering. A typical offshore installation will have a number of platform cranes that are used to lift
and laydown all items from supply boat to platform storage areas. From there they are installed in their
final locations, either by further use of the platform crane, or by mechanical handling devices. With the
constant emphasis on safety, these operations are extremely important and are constantly taking place
on some of the larger production platforms.
Platform cranes are normally the responsibility of Crane Companies such as Sparrows and Leibherr, who
are employed by the Operators to maintain and operate the cranes. These will generally run day-to-day
activities without requirement for specific analysis. Structural engineers employed in Brownfield
engineering are mainly involved in the design and assessment of lifting operations by other mechanical
means. This sections deals with the requirements for the design and testing of steel overhead runway
beams along with the certification of steelwork for use in lifting operations. The design of rigging,
Padeyes and assessment of package lifts can be found in section 5.0.

4.2 General Information

Structural engineers employed in Brownfield Engineering are heavily involved in lifting and installation
operations. The competencies that structural engineers require are:

♦ Be aware of Legislation, which will vary from region to region. The UK is extremely well legislated.
♦ Be able to design lift beams and runway beams.
♦ Be able to carry out rigging and installation studies.

Page 2
 MSc OIL AND GAS STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING – EG5098 - Brownfield Engineering

♦ Be able to check the structural integrity of supporting steelwork subjected to lifting and installation
operations.
♦ Produce formal lift plans and installation sequences drawings.
♦ Be able to specify lifting equipment such as shackles, slings and padeyes.
♦ Be familiar with lifting manufacturers equipment from main suppliers such as Crosby; Prolift and
Certex.
♦ Work with construction and rigging personnel.
♦ Advise on destruct and reinstatement aspects.
♦ Check load bearing scaffolding designs (Normal scaffolding can be left to Construction personnel to
specify and build).
♦ Provide constant technical on-call cover for key construction periods such as shutdowns and planned
maintenance.
♦ Be able to undertake offshore surveys and offer on-site technical support and advice as required.

In a typical ISC contract, the structural team spend about 20% of their time on activities associated with
lifting and installation. It can be quite a frustrating subject for newcomers to master, because it is not
taught at University level, and there are no universally recognised standards. Some Operators produce
their own lifting standards, and some employ specialist technical people to be focal points for all lifting
and installation matters on specific installations. The subject also has a large “hands on” content, and
often the real experts are the construction personnel who carry out the works.

Page 3
 MSc OIL AND GAS STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING – EG5098 - Brownfield Engineering

As mentioned previously, some countries such as the UK have extensive legislation. The UK has 2 major
legal documents that must be considered when undertaking lifting and rigging operations. These are:

1. Lifting Operations & Lifting Equipment Regulations (LOLER)

In general terms, the LOLER Regulations require that lifting equipment provided for use at work is:
strong and stable enough for the particular use, marked to indicate Safe Working Loads (SWL)
positioned and installed to minimise any risks; used safely, i.e. the work is planned, organised and
performed by competent people; and subject to ongoing thorough examination and, where appropriate,
inspected by competent people.

2. Provision And Use Of Work Equipment Regulations (PUWER)

In general terms, the PUWER Regulations require that equipment (such as lifting equipment) provided
for use at work is: suitable for the intended use; safe for use, maintained in a safe condition and, in
certain circumstances, inspected to ensure this remains the case; used only by people who have
received adequate information, instruction and training; and accompanied by suitable safety measures,
e.g. protective devices, markings, & warnings.

Further information on these regulations can be obtained from the Health and Safety Executive. The
content of these regulations should be understood before undertaking any work that falls within their
remit.

In this section of the course, we will concentrate on the assessment of structural steelwork; to
understand what must be checked to ensure steelwork is fit for purpose when used in lifting operations.
Section 5.0 will focus in more detail on the design of lifting points, rigging and general lift analysis
related to the package that is to be lifted.

Page 4
 MSc OIL AND GAS STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING – EG5098 - Brownfield Engineering

4.3 Steelwork Assessment and Design

4.3.1 Runway Beams

The design and testing of steel overhead runway beams must comply with BS2853: 1957. This British
Standard specifies the minimum requirements for the design and testing of fixed overhead runway
beams made from rolled steel sections. The standard applies to the runway beams and their
components only: it does not apply to the supporting structures, trolleys and lifting appliances operating
on the beam. The structure supporting the runway beam should be checked in accordance with the
relevant steel design code. i.e. AISC, BS5950 or Euro code 3 and equipment used on the beam should
be specified with adequate SWL certificates, normally obtained from vendor information.

Design Loads
When undertaking the design of a steel overhead runway beam, the following criteria must be
considered:

1. When computing the stresses in runway beams, account shall be taken of load lifted, weight of
the beam, weight of lifting appliance and the amount of effort exerted on the hand chain.
2. To account for dynamic affects the total maximum static wheel loads shall be increased as
follows:
i. For runways utilising power-operated appliances = 25%
ii. For runways utilising hand-operated appliances = 10%

Allowable Beam Stress

The bending stresses in the extreme fibers should be checked to account for both the longitudinal fibres

bending stress (f1) from the span of the beam and the transverse bending stress (f2) from the local
deflection of the flange supporting the trolley. Further to this, if the runway beam is subjected to an out

of plane load, the minor axis bending stress (f3) must also be considered.

The bending stress in the beam f1 & f3 is calculated in the traditional fashion for major and minor axis
bending.
M
f1 =
Z
The bending stress in the flange (f2) is calculated from the formulae provided in Appendix G of the
British Standard. There are two separate formulae to use, depending on whether the trolley is in the
middle of the beam or at the edge of the beam.

Page 5
 MSc OIL AND GAS STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING – EG5098 - Brownfield Engineering

The formulae are as follows:

When the trolley is remote from the end of the beam:

1.4CW
f2 =
K1T 2

When the trolley is at the end of the beam or at a joint where edges of the flange are unsupported:

1.4CW
f2 =
K 2T 2

The values for C, K1 & K2 can be found in the appendix of the British Standard and vary depending on
the type of trolley in use, (2 wheels or 4 wheels) the width of the flange and the point at which the
trolley rests on the flange. The value of W is equal to the total static wheel load; including the D.A.F
stated above and T is the mean thickness of the flange.

The bending stresses that are found using these formulas are then plotted on a graph in appendix G of
the standard to ensure that the combined stresses do not increase beyond the allowable stress of the
steel.

Deflection Limits
The maximum measured deflection of any runway beam under the SWL shall not exceed the following
limits:

1. 1/500 of the span for a beam

2. 1/250 of the span for a cantilever beam

Load Testing
All runway beams must be load tested in place to ensure the design is suitable for the SWL rating and to
confirm that the connections to the existing structure have been installed correctly and that they are
capable of withstanding the SWL.

The amount of proof load applied for the purpose of certification shall be the weight of the heaviest
lifting appliance (i.e. trolley) supported by the runway beam plus 25% in excess of the SWL lifted by the
appliance. If the runway beam supports more than one lifting appliance due allowance must be made
for the permissible proximity of any other lifting appliance.

Page 6
 MSc OIL AND GAS STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING – EG5098 - Brownfield Engineering

For example if the SWL of the runway beam is 2Te and the weight of the trolley and rigging is 125Kg
the proof load test would be calculated as follows:

(2000 + 125) x 1.25 = 2656kg

Special Considerations
The following points should also be noted when designing a runway beam

1. Ensure end stops are provided to stop the trolley from falling from the runway beam. Angle
cleats are normally used, but ensure these are sufficiently long so that the trolley cannot roll
below them.
2. When designing a cantilever runway beam remember that the fixity of the beam onto the
existing structure will determine the effective length of the cantilever for calculation of bending
stress. This is briefly dealt with in the appendix G of the British standard.
3. Connection to the supporting structure and deflection of the existing structure may contribute to
the overall deflection of the runway beam.

Page 7
 MSc OIL AND GAS STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING – EG5098 - Brownfield Engineering

4.3.2 Certification of existing Steelwork

In some circumstances it may not be possible to lift and move equipment using a runway beam. In
these situations the existing steelwork around the worksite may be required to aid in the removal. This
is sometimes referred to in the industry as lifting from uncertified steelwork. It is the structural
engineer’s responsibility to ensure that any steelwork used in lifting operation has been checked and is
fit for purpose.

In order to do this, a lift plan will often be drawn up to confirm the following:

1. Size and weight of the package to be moved

2. The beams that are to be used in vertical lift and cross haul operations
3. The route the load will take to reach final laydown location
4. The equipment that will be required to undertake the operation i.e. beam clamps, chain block
etc.
When this is confirmed the structural engineer will undertake analysis on the beams to confirm they are
capable of taking the proposed lift weight.

Vertical Lift Cross Haul

Figure 1: The use of beam clamps for cross haul and vertical lift operations

Page 8
 MSc OIL AND GAS STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING – EG5098 - Brownfield Engineering

Initial Assessment
To assess whether a beam is suitable for the proposed lift load the following should be checked:

1. The size, section weight and steel grade of the existing beam
2. The condition of the existing beam. i.e. significant corrosion
3. The condition of the connections to any supporting steelwork
4. The overall span of the beam and any other significant fixity i.e. flange restraint
5. Current loading without the addition of lifting load

Design Loads
When undertaking checks of existing steelwork account of the following loads should be taken:

1. The Load to be lifted

2. Any existing load on the beam
3. The self weight of the beam
4. The weight of lifting appliance
5. The amount of effort that will be exerted on the hand chain to assess a D.A.F.

Most lifting operations using uncertified steelwork will involve manual pull chains. As a result the
dynamic amplification factor will be in line with runway beam design, i.e. 10% of total lift weight.
Otherwise, if motorised lifting equipment is used then a 25% D.A.F may be applicable.

Beam Stresses
The bending stresses in the extreme fibers should be checked to account for both the longitudinal
bending stress (f1) from the span of the beam and the transverse bending stress (f2) from the local
deflection of the flange supporting the beam clamp. Further to this, if a cross haul operation is
undertaken, an out of plane load will be produced; therefore the minor axis bending stress (f3) must
also be considered.

Direct Lift design procedure

The bending stress in the beam (f1) is calculated in the traditional fashion for major axis bending.

M
f1 =
Z

The bending stress in the flange (f2) is calculated based on the total load to be lifted being equally
distributed over the two jaws of the clamp. Each side of the flange is then treated as a cantilever. The

Page 9
 MSc OIL AND GAS STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING – EG5098 - Brownfield Engineering

load on the end of each cantilever produces a moment at the centre line of the web which is equal and
opposite. This ensures that the moment does not need to be resisted by the web of the section. The
critical section through the flange is not at the point of maximum moment. The area considered critical
is at the toe of the root radius prior to the increase in thickness as the flange passed the web.

Mmax

F/2 F/2 Area of Flange assessment

Figure 2 - Effect of direct lift on lower flange

The area which is assessed for resistance of the load is based on a 60° spread from the jaw of the
clamp to the root radius and will also include the width of the clamp. For example if the beam flange
width is 200mm, the distance from the edge of the flange to the root radius will be in the order of
85mm and if the width of the clamp jaw is 100mm then the total width of flange able to resist the
bending moment would be:

Width of utilised flange = 100mm + 2 x 85 x tan 60 = 394mm

This width is then used in conjunction with the thickness of the flange to provide the elastic section
modulus for the flange. This is then used to calculate the bending stress (f2) in the flange.

LT 2 Mf
Zf = & f2 =
6 Zf

The stresses from the major axis bending stress and flange bending stress are then combined to ensure
the maximum allowable yield stress is not exceeded.

If the design stresses are within acceptable limits for any given national code then the beam must finally
be checked to ensure excessive deformation will not occur under the lifting operation. Serviceability
limits can be used as guidance (i.e. span / 360), but each beam under consideration will be dependant
on what it already supports and engineering judgment must be used to decide on a maximum allowable
deflection on a case by case basis.

Page 10
 MSc OIL AND GAS STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING – EG5098 - Brownfield Engineering

Cross haul design procedure

If a cross haul operation is undertaken then further calculations to those stated for the direct lift must
be undertaken to ensure the beam is still satisfactory. As a rule of thumb the cross haul capacity will be
approximately half of that for a direct lift due to the additional loads induced by the horizontal action on
the flange. This issue is discussed in more detail here:

The bending stress in the beam (f1) is calculated in the traditional fashion for major axis bending.

M
f1 =
Z

A cross haul operation provides much more complex behavior within the bottom flange than a direct lift
for the calculation of f2. The eccentricity between the centre line of the beam clamp pin and the centre
line of the flange will produce an additional moment on the flange, which depending on the angle of pull
may significantly increase the bending moment in the flange. Further to this, because of the imbalance
between each side of the flange the web is also required to resist the moment.

Mmax
- FH

FHS

Fv / 2
FHS Fv / 2

+ FH F Section of Flange & Web to be checked

Fv

Figure 3 - Effect of cross haul on lower flange, showing moment imbalance

When a direct lift is undertaken, the bending stress is assessed at the toe of the root radius as this is
the point on the flange where the thickness increases as it approached the web. This is also true of the
cross haul, except the web of the beam must also be considered. The activated flange and web lengths
to resist the moment are calculated in the same way as previously discussed. Further to this, the
horizontal load (FHS) and its affect on the bottom flange must be assessed. This is normally done by
considering whether the bottom flange can transfer the horizontal load in bending back to the support
points. This will only work however, if the bottom flange is restrained at the supports, otherwise the
horizontal load must be taken to the mid point of the beam and will therefore increase the bending
moment in the web at the connection to the upper flange.
Page 11
 MSc OIL AND GAS STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING – EG5098 - Brownfield Engineering

The stresses from the major axis bending stress and flange bending stress are combined to ensure the
maximum allowable yield stress is not exceeded. Further to this the stress in the web must also be
check to ensure it has sufficient capacity against the moments due to rotation.

As with a vertical lift the maximum allowable deflection under will be dependant on what the existing
beam already supports and engineering judgment must be used to decide on maximum allowable
deflection on a case-by-case basis.

Page 12
 MSc OIL AND GAS STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING – EG5098 - Brownfield Engineering

4.4 Runway Beam Design Example

Introduction
As part of a manifold installation in the utility leg of an existing offshore installation, the personnel
require runway beams to move equipment from the access hatch to the final manifold location. The
runway beams are required to sit below existing pipework, which currently runs at various elevations
below the deck above. The runway beams will therefore require hangers running from the above deck
floor beams down below existing pipework.

Materials
Grade 355 for new steel
Grade 235 for existing steel
Grade 8.8 bolts

References
AISC ASD 9th Edition for design of steel structures
BS449: Part 2 WSD to check connections
BS 2853: 1957 for the design of steel overhead runway beams

Loads
At this time the weight of the largest piece of the manifold will be approx 1.5Te. For the purpose of this
design assume that a beam trolley with a S.W.L of 2Te will be used to move the equipment.
So the weight of all the pieces for the design:
S.W.L = 2000Kg
Runway beam (assume 254UB43) = 180Kg
Trolley = 25 Kg
Chain = 100Kg
Dynamic effect = 10% of vertical Load (Hand operated appliances)

Total = 2535Kg = 25kN (vertical) < proof load test = (2000 + 125) x1.25=2656kg

Lateral force = 26.5 x 0.2 =5.5kN (AISC A4)

Longitudinal Force = 26.5 x 0.1 =3kN (AISC A4)

Page 13
 MSc OIL AND GAS STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING – EG5098 - Brownfield Engineering

GENERAL ARRANGEMENT

Figure 4 - Plan view showing layout of runway beams

Page 14
MSc OIL AND GAS STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING – EG5098 - Brownfield Engineering

Figure 5 - Sections through the runway beams

Page 15
MSc OIL AND GAS STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING – EG5098 - Brownfield Engineering

Figure 6 – View looking up at Runway beams

Figure 7 - View looking along the runway beams

Page 16
 MSc OIL AND GAS STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING – EG5098 - Brownfield Engineering

Runway Beam Design

Check moments in runway beam, worst span = 6000mm & largest cantilever = 800mm
26.5 26.5 x6
∴ reactions for span Ra = Rb = = 13.5kN , M max = = 40kNm
2 4
26.5 x6.8
∴ reaction for cantilever = = 32kN, M = 26.5 x0.8 = 21.2kNm ∴ main span is the worst case
6
∴ Design moment M zz = 40kNm
5.5 x6
Design moment M yy = = 9kNm (Assuming 20% horizontal load)
4
vertical reaction Fx = 32kN

pl 3 26.5 x10 3 x6000 3 Span

Δspan = = = 9mm ∴
48EI 48 x 205 x10 x6544 x10
3 4
660
pa
(l + a ) = 26.5 x103 x800 4 (6000 + 800) = 3mm ∴ Span
2 3 2
Δcantilever =
3EI 3x 205 x10 x6544 x10 260

Use BS2853 :1957 to determine runway beam size Try 254 x 146 UB 43
P = 26.5kN, M zz = 40kNm M yy = 9kNm
M 40 x10 6
f1 = = = 80 N / mm 2 ≈ 5.2tonf / in 2
Z xx 504 x10 3
1.4CW 1.4 x0.6 x 26.5 x10 3
& f2 = = = 138 N / mm 2 ≈ 9tonf / in 2 ∴ Use Fig. 6 by inspection beam ok
K 1T 2
1.0 x12.7 2

check minor axis bending

9 x10 6
f3 = = 98 N / mm 2 < 0.75 Fy ∴Section ok
92 x10 3

Adopt 254 x 146 UB 43 for runway beam

Page 17
 MSc OIL AND GAS STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING – EG5098 - Brownfield Engineering

Lateral Brace Design

max Lateral force into brace = 5.5kN Brace member at 30 o & force puts brace member
5.5
into compression ∴ F1 = = 11kN , F2 = 9.5kN Try 80 x 80 x 8 RSA
sin 30
ACTUAL STRESS
F2 F1
11x10 3
fa = = 9 N / mm 2
1230
5.5kN
ALLOWABLE STRESS

Assumptions : l = 2.64 2 + 1.66 2 = 3120mm, k = 1.0 & rv = 15.6mm

kl 1.0 x3120 12 xπ 2 x 205 x10 3

∴ = = 200 so Fa = = 26 N / mm 2 (E2 - 2)
rv 15.6 23 x 200 2

9
Ut = = 0.35 < 1.0 ∴ section ok
26
Adopt 80 x 8 RSA

Knee Brace Design

From STAAD model maximum compression force in brace member is 5kN
By inspection Knee brace less onerous than lateral brace, therefore adopted same section.

Adopt 80 x 8 RSA
Hanger design
Most onerous load on hanger is when trolley is directly below the hanger.

∴ F = 32kN , so by inspection adopt 152 x152 UC 30.

Adopt 152 x 152 UC 30

Page 18
 MSc OIL AND GAS STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING – EG5098 - Brownfield Engineering

Typical Hanger connections to HEA650

Adopt M 20 Gr 8.8 bolts, Tensile capacity per bolt = 68kN

32
& load per bolt = = 8kN ∴ bolts ok by inspection
4
Capacity of 6mm fillet weld = 0.672kN/mm ∴ Fillet weld ok by inspection

60 x15 2
Bending in plate = 8 x50 = 400kNmm & Z xx = = 2250mm 2
6
400 x10 3
∴ fb = = 177 N/mm 2 < 0.75 Fy ∴ 15mm Thick plate ok & by inspection HEA650 flange ok
2250

Page 19
 MSc OIL AND GAS STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING – EG5098 - Brownfield Engineering

Typical Hanger connections to runway beam

Page 20
 MSc OIL AND GAS STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING – EG5098 - Brownfield Engineering

Typical Knee brace connections

5 Fillet
100 x 10 RSA

5 Fillet
100 x 10 RSA
10THK PLT

10THK PLT

Since only nominal load in brace = 4.6kN

Adopt M20 Gr 8.8 bolts, capacity per bolt = 58kN
strength of 6mm fillet = 0.67kN/mm ∴ connections ok by inspection

Existing Structure Check

Check HEA650 for midspan point load

Check to see utilistion of HEA650 due to runway beam load only

26.5 x13.5 90 x10 6

∴ m xx = = 90kNm ∴ f b = = 16.5 N / mm 2
4 5474 x10 3

16.5
∴Ut = = 0.11 ∴ since this is a temporary load Section ok by inspection
155

26.5kN

13500

Page 21
 MSc OIL AND GAS STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING – EG5098 - Brownfield Engineering

4.5 Certification of Existing steelwork – Example 1 Vertical Lift

The following example shows how a 254 x 146 UB 43 spanning three meters and supporting an existing
load above of 5kN/m2 should be check for a vertical lift of 3000Kg.

CHECK 254x146UB43 SPAN 3m for Vertical Lift Design Code - AISC 9th. edition

3
kN ≡ newton ⋅ 10 N ≡ newton

Vessel weight W l := 3000kg

Rigging weight W r := 50kg estimated

Lifting DAF DAF := 1.1 Manual pull chain

Load ( )
W := W l + W r ⋅ DAF⋅ g W = 32.901kN

Span S := 3.0m Buckling Length Lb := 3.0m 40 thick grating above

N kN
Fy := 355⋅ E := 205⋅ Cb := 1.0 Cl := 125mm Clamp jaw size
2 2
mm mm

Section Properties

BEAM := "254x146UB43"

3
Z := 504cm d := 259⋅ mm tf := 12.7mm b f := 147mm d w := d − 2⋅ tf tw := 7.2⋅ mm rr := 7.6mm

kN kN
udl := 5 ⋅ 1.0m udl = 5
2 m
m

dw
Calculation of rt d rt := A rt := tf⋅ b f + d rt⋅ tw
6
3 3
tf⋅ b f d rt⋅ tw 4 Irt Lb
Irt := + Irt = 336.303cm rt := rt = 39.576mm λ := λ = 75.804
12 12 A rt rt

W W
Ra := Rb := Ra = 16.451kN Rb = 16.451kN
2 2

2
W⋅S udl⋅ S BM N
BM := + BM = 30.301kN⋅ m fb := fb = 60.121
4 8 Z 2
mm

From the above calculations the reactions forces on the connections can be checked, the major axis
bending moment can be verified based on appropriate national standards and the deflection due to the
temporary load can be considered.

Page 22
 MSc OIL AND GAS STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING – EG5098 - Brownfield Engineering

Once the beam is confirmed suitable for global analysis, local checks must also be undertaken to ensure
the flange is not overstressed due to the beam clamp resting on the edge of the flange. Further to this,
the combined stress of both longitudinal bending and transverse bending must be considered.

CHECK FLANGES FOR TRANSVERSE BENDING

Lever arm to root radius

⎡ ( b f − tw)⎤
la := ⎢ ⎥−r la = 62.3mm
⎣ 2 ⎦ r

Length of flange adopted (

L := la⋅ tan ( 60deg ) ⋅ 2 + Cl )
2
tf ⋅ L 3 3
L = 340.814mm Zplt := Zplt = 9.162 × 10 mm
6
la
Bending Moment BM := W ⋅ BM = 1.025kN⋅ m
2
BM N
fbf := fbf = 111.866
Zplt 2
mm
N fbf
Fbf := Fy ⋅ 0.75 Fbf = 266.25 = 0.42
2 Fbf
mm

Combined stress 2 2 N
Cs := fbf + fbf⋅ fb + fb Cs = 151.176
2
mm

Cs
Increase in Combined Stress IR CsIR := CsIR = 0.426 Includes a 5kN/m^2 deck load on top
Fy

Page 23
 MSc OIL AND GAS STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING – EG5098 - Brownfield Engineering

4.6 Certification of Existing steelwork – Example 2 Cross haul

In this example we examine the effects of the cross haul operation on the capacity of the beam that
was previously designed for a vertical lift. In the first instance the initial checks are the same, as to
begin with the cross haul operation will begin with a vertical lift.

CHECK 254x146UB43 SPAN 3.0m Cross Haul Design Code - AISC 9th. edition

3
kN ≡ newton ⋅ 10 N ≡ newton

Vessel weight W l := 3000kg

Rigging weight W r := 50kg estimated

Lifting DAF DAF := 1.1 Manual pull chain

Load ( )
W := W l + W r ⋅ DAF⋅ g W = 32.901kN

Span S := 3.0m Buckling Length Lb := 3.0m 40 thick grating above

N kN
Fy := 355⋅ E := 205⋅ Cb := 1.0
2 2
mm mm

Section Properties

BEAM := "254x146UB43"

3
Z := 504cm d := 259⋅ mm tf := 12.7mm b f := 147mm d w := d − 2⋅ tf tw := 7.2⋅ mm rr := 7.6mm

kN kN
udl := 5 ⋅ 1.0m udl = 5
2 m
m

dw
Calculation of r t d rt := A rt := tf⋅ b f + d rt⋅ tw
6
3 3
tf⋅ b f d rt⋅ tw 4 Irt Lb
Irt := + Irt = 336.303cm rt := rt = 39.576mm λ := λ = 75.804
12 12 A rt rt

W W
Ra := Rb := Ra = 16.451kN Rb = 16.451kN
2 2

2
W⋅S udl⋅ S BM N
BM := + BM = 30.301kN⋅ m fb := fb = 60.121
4 8 Z 2
mm

From the above calculations the reactions forces on the connections can be checked the major axis
bending moment can be verified appropriate national standards and the deflection due to the temporary
load can be considered.

Page 24
 MSc OIL AND GAS STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING – EG5098 - Brownfield Engineering

CHECK FLANGES FOR TRANSVERSE BENDING

Lever arm to root radius ANGLE OF THE SLING TO THE

VERTICAL = 15 DEGREES
⎡ ( b f − tw) ⎤
la := ⎢ ⎥ − rr Θ := 15deg
⎣ 2 ⎦
la = 62.3mm

Assume an eccentricity of 100mm from clamp to flange

e := 100mm

P := W ⋅ tan ( Θ) P = 8.816kN

BMe := P⋅ e
BMe = 0.882kN⋅ m

BMe
Couple forces from beam clamp Cbc := Cbc = 5.997kN
bf

Length of flange adopted (

L := la⋅ tan ( 60deg ) ⋅ 2 + Cl )
2
tf ⋅ L 3
L = 340.814mm Zplt := Zplt = 9.162cm
6

BM := ⎛⎜ + Cbc ⎟⎞ ⋅ la
W
Bending Moment BM = 0.886kN⋅ m
⎝ 4 ⎠
BM N
fbf := fbf = 96.715
Zplt 2
mm

N fbf
Fbf := Fy ⋅ 0.75 Fbf = 266.25 = 0.363
2 Fbf
mm

2 2 N
Combined stress Cs := fbf + fbf⋅ fb + fb Cs = 137.05
2
mm

Cs
Increase in Combined Stress IR CsIR := CsIR = 0.386 Includes a 5kN/m^2 deck load on top .
Fy

The calculation above ensures that the flange is adequate for the bending that is induced by the vertical
component of the load and also by the moment that is generated from the horizontal component.
Further to this, the horizontal load must also be transferred back through the lower flange into the main
section. This can be looked at in two ways, either by assuming the lower flange spans between the two
end connections or by transferring the load to the top flange where it is held by the deck above.

Page 25
 MSc OIL AND GAS STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING – EG5098 - Brownfield Engineering

Minor axis bending on lower flange (Flange spaning beam length)

Bottom flange only

Horizontal load : P = 8.816kN

P⋅ 1.9m
Bending moment BMh := BMh = 4.188kN⋅ m
4
2
t f⋅ b f 3
Bending modulus btm flg: zyy := zyy = 45.739cm
6

BMh N
Bending stress: fbyy := fbyy = 91.553
zyy 2
mm
fbyy
IR := IR = 0.43
0.6Fy

Check web for bending

Moment : BMe = 0.882kN⋅ m ( )

C := la + 2rr ⋅ tan ( 60deg ) ⋅ 2 + Cl C = 393.468mm

2
C⋅ t w 3
Elastic modulus of web : zw := zw = 3.4cm
6

BMe N
Bending stress fb := fb = 259.324
zw 2
mm
fb
IR := IR = 0.974
0.75Fy
Allow for temporary loadcase
Check web for bending

Moment : BM := P⋅ ( e + d ) ⎣⎣ ( ⎦ )
C := ⎡⎡la + 2rr + d − t f − rr ⎤ ⋅ tan ( 60deg ) ⋅ 2⎤ + Cl
⎦ C = 1.22 × 10 mm
3

2
C⋅ t w 3
Elastic modulus of web : zw := zw = 10.544cm
6

BM N
Bending stress fb := fb = 300.167
zw 2
mm
fb
IR := IR = 1.127 Allow for temporary loadcase
0.75Fy

∴ The beam is found to be acceptable

Page 26
 MSc OIL AND GAS STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING – EG5098 - Brownfield Engineering

4.7 Reference material

• BS2853:The design and testing of steel overhead beams

• BS3810:Glossary of terms used in materials handling
• The Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations 1998
• The Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998
• Safe Use of Lifting Equipment: HSE document L113
• Certex catalogue:www.certex.co.uk
• Crosby catalogue:www.thecrosbygroup.com
• Safe use of Work Equipment HSE document L22

Page 27