International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056

Volume: 06 Issue: 06 | June 2019 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

DESIGN, ANALYASIS AND OPTIMIZATION OF JIB CRANE BOOM

Govinda Chaudhari1, T.D. Garse2
1 M.Tech (Machine design) J T Mahajan College of Engg. Faizpur Maharashtra, India.
2Asst.Professor(Mechanical) J T Mahajan College of Engg.Faizpur, Maharashtra, India.
---------------------------------------------------------------------***---------------------------------------------------------------------
Abstract - The structural action of a rectangular cantilever on pontoons. Frequently, these cranes are provided with two
beam under loading is predominantly bending, with other main hoisting winches which can be employed singly or
effects such as warping, rotation, and lateral torsional together to lift a load. For handling light loads may hand
buckling the study includes an investigation of stress level auxiliary arrangement localized, such as in machine shops.
for load carrying capacity and bending of regular I section Column mounted jib cranes are commonly used in packaging
cantilever beam of jib crane subjected to self-weight and industry. The size of the crane can be visualized from the
eccentric point load at the free end. A new design is height of the operator.
proposed in this study to tackle the bending and increase the
strength of the crane. The corrugated plate is a widely used The use of variable cross section beam has been
structural element in many fields of application because of increasing in the steel construction industry. This is because
its numerous favourable properties related to resistance in of their ability to increase stability of the structure, and
out of plane twisting. sometimes to satisfy architectural and functional
requirements in many engineering structures. Tapered
Design Modules of cranes are defined from the developed beams are widely used in the modern constructions mainly
component tree of the cranes based on the available design due to their structural efficiency. At present the web tapered
procedures. Access to the "F. E. M. Rules" from any design thin walled I beam is one of the most popular tapered beams
procedure is fully automated by using a systematic approach used in practice. The strength of laterally unrestrained thin
of parametric modelling. The parametric model can be used walled beam is frequently governed by the lateral buckling
for various jib crane design cases as well as further for failure, and hence extensive studies were focused on the
optimization. lateral buckling of thin walled beams.

Finite element analysis is carried out to analyse the effect of Cantilever I section beam is a component of the jib crane
geometrical parameters of various web shapes. Structural used in Diesel Loco shed which is located in Shivajinagar,
analysis is done to examine the influence of the section Pune. This component is liable to fail due to lateral torsional
dimensions due to eccentric point load at the free end on buckling, the design of the crane for industry aims to ensure
cantilever. the safety for selected components.

Key Words: stress Analysis, Complex structure, FEA 2. PROJECT OVERVIEW:-

(ANSYS), Stress Bluntness, CATIA
Jib crane boom is subjected to bending stresses mostly. Due
1. INTRODUCTION:- to these stresses jib crane booms tends to fail under bending.
To reduce the load on the jib crane boom we have changed
A jib crane is in effect a monorail that is cantilevered the sections of web of the I beam of the Jib crane boom. In
from its supporting members and pivoted at one end. The this study we have worked on the Jib Crane Boom
horizontal beam provides the track for the hoist trolley. Jib specimens. Dimensions of the Jib Crane Boom will be found
crane have three degrees of freedom. They are vertical, through references and catalogues.
radial, and rotary. However, they cannot reach into corners.
They are usually used where activity is localized. Lifting Initially CAD model of an existing Jib crane boom is
capacity of such cranes may vary from 0.5 ton to 200 ton and created on CATIA V5, then it is analysed through finite
outreach from a few meters to 50 meters. Such cranes find element software (ANSYS). After analysing the existing Jib
various applications in port area, construction site and other Crane boom, analysis of different web sections is carried out.
outdoor works. For handling general cargo, lifting capacities
usually 1.5 ton to 5 ton with maximum out reach of 30 After getting suitable results, model of the Jib crane boom
meters. Jib crane provided with grabbing facilities have is fabricated and then it is tested under UTM subjected to
usually a capacity ranging from 3 ton operating 50 to 100 specific boundary conditions, tested results were compared
cycles per hour. Lifting heights may be 30 meter or more. with the FEA results.

Jib cranes used in ship yards for lifting heavy machinery

equipment, weighing 100 to 300 tons, are usually mounted

© 2019, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.211 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 3014
 International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 06 Issue: 06 | June 2019 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

3. METHODOLOGY:- 4. EXPERIMENTAL SETUP:-

We can know how the CAD model which is to be prepared. The specimen is placed in the machine between the
The conditions required for applying various constraints and grips and an extensometer if required can automatically
how the loads are applied is briefed about in the technical record the change in gauge length during the test. If an
papers referred. extensometer is not fitted, the machine itself can record the
displacement between its cross heads on which the
Getting input data on dimensions of I-beam from specimen is held. However, this method not only records the
market/available resource/journal papers etc. change in length of the specimen but also all other extending
/ elastic components of the testing machine and its drive
systems including any slipping of the specimen in the grips.

Once the machine is started it begins to apply an

increasing load on specimen. Throughout the tests the
control system and its associated software record the load
and extension or compression of the specimen.

Figure3.1: CAD Model

Figure4.1: Universal Testing Machine

For testing we have fixed one end of the I beam to a rigid

block and then as it’s a cantilever loading, load is applied on
the another end as per calculations, as the load incresed
Figure3.2: Sketch of Model from zero to the design load; Load versus deflection graph
is generated by data acquisition system sensed through
Determination of loads:
load sensors in UTM the deformation of I Beam is then
 Studying various loads that are acting on the validated through FEA Results.
component.
 Determining the magnitude and direction of loads.
a. Capacity of crane (W)= 500Kg
b. Load acting on the boom (F) = W x g= 500 x
9.81=4905 N in downward Direction. i.e. (-Z)
direction over 100 mm span at free end.
c. Fixed support = Master Dia (E)= 8” = 203.2mm ~
204mm.

Figure 1.2: Data acquisition system

Figure3.3: Boundary Conditions of Boom

Figure4.3: Test Bed

© 2019, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.211 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 3015
 International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 06 Issue: 06 | June 2019 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

4.1 Experimental Validations:- 5. FINITE ELEMNT MODELLING OF BOOM:-

Manufacturing Considerations of Proposed Design:- Finite Element Method:-

As we are aware that manufacturing of I Beam is tough The finite element method (FEM) sometimes referred to as
extrusion process but in out Prototype model we are making finite element analysis (FEA), is a computational technique
a scale down model because of testing rig bed size used to obtain approximate solutions of boundary value
limitations of 800mm, for the I sectioned beam we have problems in engineering. Simply stated, a boundary value
considered the following assumptions. For the scale down problem is a mathematical problem in which one or more
model accordingly loads will be reduced on the basis of scale dependent variables must satisfy a differential equation
down ratio. The middle I segment of beam is made everywhere within a known domain of independent
rectangular profile by milling also by maintaining the variables and satisfy specific conditions on the boundary of
dimensions as per drawing and then we have done the the domain. Boundary value problems are also sometimes
welding on the upper and lower plate. called field problems. The field is the domain of interest and
most often represents a physical structure. The field
For testing we have fixed one end of the I beam to a rigid variables are the dependent variables of interest governed
block and then as it’s a cantilever loading, load is applied on by the differential equation. The boundary conditions are the
the another end as per calculations, as the load incresed specified values of the field variables (or related variables
from zero to the design load; Load versus deflection graph is such as derivatives) on the boundaries of the field.
generated by data acquisition system sensed through load Depending on the type of physical problem being analyzed,
sensors in UTM the deformation of I Beam is then validated the field variables may include physical displacement,
through FE Results. temperature, heat flux, and fluid velocity to name only a few.

Following are the results displayed for stress and

deformation (SS):

Figure4.1.1: Proposed scale down model of boom

Experimental Test Results:-

Figure5.1: von-mises stress for boom

Stress value for boom is 193.54 N/mm2 which is well below

the critical value. Hence, design is safe.

Figure4.1.2: Experimental Test Results

Experimental Results:-

Sr. No Design Deformation (mm) Figure5.2: Displacement result for boom

1 Original Design 8.18 Finite element analysis summary:-
2 Proposal 4 7.7
The maximum stress value for I section boom is coming
Table4.1.1: Experimental Results out to be 193.54 N/mm2 which is within the safety limit; we
have scope for optimizing the topology without affecting its
structural behaviour rather increasing its load bearing
capacity. The maximum displacement value is 8.188mm
which we must refer.

© 2019, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.211 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 3016
 International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 06 Issue: 06 | June 2019 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

Finite Element Results:- Stress and Deformation plot for Proposal 5:-
Stress and Deformation plot for Proposal 1:-

Fig5.11: Von-mises stress for 5 Fig5.12: Displacement

Fig5.3: Stress plot for 1 Fig5.4: Deformation plot for 1 result for 5 Results

Stress and Deformation plot for Proposal 2:- obtained from the ANSYS:-

Stress Deformation
Sr. No. Design
(Mpa) (mm)
1 Original Design 193.5 8.18
2 Proposal 1 330.297 9.76
3 Proposal 2 193.202 7.85
4 Proposal 3 186.17 8.67
5 Proposal 4 150.484 7.81
6 Proposal 5 160.65 7.83
Table5.1:Results obtained from the ANSYS
Fig5.5: Von-mises stress for 2 Fig5.6: Displacement
result for 2 The above results are showing stress and
deformation of Jib Crane from all iterations. It is observed
Stress and Deformation plot for Proposal 3:- that the proposal 4 having lesser values for stress and
deformation compared to all the proposals and original
design.
The maximum stress value is coming out to be 193.
54 N/mm2 which is within the safety limit. We have scope
for optimizing its topology without effecting its structural
behaviour rather increasing its load bearing capacity. The
maximum displacement value is 8.188 mm which we must
reduce.
As it has been seen from the Finite Element Results
Fig5.7: Von-mises stress for 3 Fig5.8: that the Proposal 4 design is having lesser stress values for
Displacement result for 3 the same loadings also the deformation is lesser compared to
all other proposals and original design.
Stress and Deformation plot for Proposal 4:-
Comparison of Finite Element Results with the
Experimental Results:-

Deformation (mm)
Sr.No. Error(%)
FEA Experimental
1 7.81 7.7 3.5
Table 5.2: Comparison of Results

5. CONCLUSION AND RESULT:-

A New design approach of the beam shape has been
Fig5.9: Von-mises stress for 4 Fig5.10:Displacement proposed to reduce the deformation and stresses generated
result for 4 due to direct loading, we had scope for optimizing its
topology without affecting its structural behaviour rather
increasing its load bearing capacity. So we have made
possible topological shape changes in the web, various web
profiles has been designed for the boom, keeping the
© 2019, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.211 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 3017
 International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 06 Issue: 06 | June 2019 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072

analysis on the original design and five other proposed

designs, we concluded that the proposed model 4 i.e.
rectangular web section design of boom is the best amongst
all. It showed 150.484 Mpa stress along with 7.81mm
deformation.

Now the experimental validation is carried out using

UTM and the graph thus produced gives us 7.7mm
deformation. Thus generating 23% less stress and 5% less
deformation as compared to the original web design. This
value is close to the obtained values of stress and
deformation from the FE Results, we obtained the 3.5%
error in FE Results and Experimental results.

Therefore, from the experimental and Analysis we

conclude that the rectangular web section design increases
the load bearing capacity of the boom with lesser
deformation and it is best amongst all the proposed designs.

REFERENCES:-

1. Mr.Faud Hadzikadunic, “An Analysis of Jib Crane

Constructive Solution In Exploatation”, 12th
International Conference TMT 2008, Istanbul, Turkey,
26–30 August, 2008.
2. Gerdemeli I., K. Kurt S“Design and Analysis with Finite
Element Method of Jib Crane”, Faculty of ME Istanbul
Technical University – Turkey.
3. Chirag A. Vakani, “Analysis and Optimization of 270° Jib
Crane Deflection”, IJSRD,Vol.2, Issue 10, 2014, ISSN
(online): 2321-0613.
4. Subhash N.Khetre “Modelling and Stress Analysis of
Column Bracket for Rotary Jib Crane”(IJMET), ISSN
0976–6340(Print), ISSN 0976–6359(Online),Volume5,
Issue 11, November (2014), pp. 130-139
5. Ajinkya Karpe“Validation of Use of Fem (Ansys) For
Structural Analysis of Tower Crane Jib and Static and
Dynamic Analysis of Tower Crane Jib Using
Ansys”(IJIRAE) ISSN: 2349-2163, Volume 1 Issue 4 (May
2014).

© 2019, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.211 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 3018