Showing posts with label energyWind. Show all posts
Showing posts with label energyWind. Show all posts

570' crane not properly stowed overnight in New York City on Feb 5, 2016

A crawler crane in NYC fell over. I came across the investigation's report.
US Government
[Note that the couterweight stacks remained intact even though the house had been flipped 180 degrees.]
20171204 8380
Since the accident was that a luffer crane fell straight forward, let me first introduce some terminology for a luffer crane.

This photo shows a Manitowoc 2250 crane in its stowed or parked position because the day was too windy to work. The boom attached to the crane is called the main boom, and the boom attached to the main boom is called the luffer jib. Typically, the main boom is called the boom and the luffer jib is called the jib.
This view allows me to see the tip of the jib. Note the tip of the jib is resting on a block to hold some of the weight when it is stowed.

Digitally Zoomed


Peter Quinn posted
This Manatowoc MLC 300 is in a normal operating position. During operation, the main boom stays in a fixed vertical position of around 80 degrees and the radius of the load is changed by raising and lowering the jib.
To lay the boom down, first put wheels on the tip and...
...then lower the main boom. Note in Peter's photo that they have left the tip wheels on. If the winds are going to be too high, some cranes are big enough that they need to be stowed with the boom laid down rather than just jack knifed.
This is one in a sequence of 13 photos showing a luffer crane "waking up" in the morning.


If you scroll down in this page you can find a video of the crane falling over. After the videographer observes that it is falling over, mute the audio because the rest of the sound track is just continuous expletives.

The Liebherr LR1300 had a 194' main boom with a 371' luffing jib. It was installed on the street to raise generators and cooling towers onto the roof of a 25-story building. There was no load on the crane other than the "headache balls" (hooks) as they were trying to lay the boom down on the street to weather a windy snow storm that was in progress. Evidently the crane was left overnight with its boom up because the first thing the operator tried to do when he arrived was to lower the boom. The report is a little ambiguous, but it sounds like the crane was parked overnight with its boom and jib at 80 and 45 degrees, respectively.

Page 7
The tip of the jib hit some buildings as it fell, so the end of the jib got smacked up pretty good. A woman who was getting into her car as the boom fell on it was killed. (A crane should have a big red button mounted near the cab door so that the operator can easily push it as he is bailing out of the cab. This button would activate a continuous, distinctive siren so that people up to 570' away would know to stop what

So strike one was that they did not park it overnight in a Jack Knife position.

The report on page 14 talks about the main boom angle in Figure 12 but doesn't say anything about the luffer angle. If I look at Figure 12, the operator lowered the main boom instead of the luffer boom. Specifically, the main boom went from 80.1 to 69.4 to 34.5 while the luffer was still at 13.9. Lowering the wrong boom would be strike two. Unlike baseball, that is enough strikes to be out.

Furthermore, a storm had been predicted:
At the end of the day on February 4, 2016, the weather forecast for the wind for the night and the next morning were reportedly known to Galasso Trucking & Rigging Inc. but no  decision was taken to lay down the crane. That proved to be a grievous error. . [Page 35] 
The report could have stopped right after the computer read-out analysis because the two errors that caused the problem have already been identified: 1) it wasn't stowed properly, especially since a storm had been predicted and 2) the jib was not lowered before the main boom was lowered. Instead the report continues with a wind analysis that concludes that it is safe at any wind speed between 20 and 30 mph with an 80-degree boom angle and it is not safe at any wind speed at a 69.4-degree angle. In fact, the manufactures load chart does not even have entries for angles below 75 degrees. Was this wind analysis done because government employees feel that they have to write long reports even if it means inventing some filler? Or is it done to try to distract the reader from the root causes --- operator errors? One tidbit I did learn by scanning the report is that, because of the long jib, it is not safe in the jack knife position for winds above 20mph according to the operators manual. The boom should have been laid down overnight given the prediction of a storm. But when email was sent to Liebherr for an analysis of this specific case, the jack knife position would have been safe up to 67 mph.

The site plan indicates the crane should be stowed in a jack knife position, pages 36 and 46. The report whines about the plan not indicating which angles it should be stowed with. But if everybody is willing to ignore that the crane was left sticking up in the air rather than jack knifed, they sure aren't going to pay attention to specific angles. Furthermore, as long as the end of the jib is resting on the ground, I don't think the angles matter. So the author's concern about the specific angles indicates a lack of expertise concerning cranes.

The operational error of the crane not being properly stowed before the storm is not only the fault of the person sitting in the chair, but his entire line of supervision and all contractor and city employees who are responsible for safety/inspection.. Somebody should have noticed that the site was left with a "ticking time bomb" standing up in the air. If none of the safety and/or inspection personnel for that site in a city that large could recognize a problem that is that obvious, then what kind of personnel competency are the city fees and city taxes paying for?

As for the operator lowering the boom instead instead of the jib, did panic cause such a significant "brain burp?"

John Hartline commented on Clyde's posting
[Another example of luffer cranes being parked in the jackknife position overnight. This is two Manitowoc 2250's at a Notre Dame job.]





Share:

Transporting Windmilll Parts by Ship

This is an extraction of the ship transport information from Transporting Windmill Parts. It was getting too big, and I wanted to isolate the info of interest to boat nerds. A disproportionate number of the ships are on the St. Lawrence Seaway because of a Facebook group I belong to. The other photos I found in Facebook crane groups.

(Update: Tower segments are also carried on the rail deck of the SS Badger ferry.)

Ports of Indiana
[I wonder if these are being imported or exported. I read about a forklift handling the big blades like "toothpicks." Judging from the men standing by the blade, the tires on this forklift are about waist high. Given that the ship has three cranes, it is interesting that a dock side crane is also being used.]

This video taught me why they needed a ground based crane even though the ship had its own cranes. It appears that the ship normally docks with its cranes on the dock side and passes the load between the cranes. But in this case the load was too long to pass between the cranes. So they docked the ship with the ship's cranes out of the way and brought in a land based crane to handle the blades.

Screenshot from a video posted by Jane Herrick
Marshract entering Duluth with wind turbines.
[It says "Amsterdam" on the stern so this would be a "salty." (It is small enough to go through the St. Lawrence Seaway.)]
Paul R Murray posted three photos, one of which is going under the Bluewater Bridges. His comment: "MUNTGRACHT - Upbound Port Huron, Michigan 5-14-2017."

1

2

3
Lynda Crothers posted three photos with the comment: "Palabora downbound passing Cape Vincent, Monday morning 9 am with wind mill blades."

Downbound is a big deal because it implies USA or Canada is exporting blades.
1

2

3
Barbara Hutt Phillips posted
Interesting! Went by Chippewa Point about ten minutes ago heading downward. Quickly grabbed my camera!


Geoff Miller posted
Carrying wind turbine parts
[I find it very depressing that American can't even build new things anymore. Instead of trying to save underground coal mining, the Feds should have subsidized windmill (and solar panel) plants in West Virginia to create jobs for coal miners.]
David Kaye posted a couple of photos of windmill blades going through the Soo Lock with the comment: "HHL Amur up bound at the West Pier of the Soo Locks. 6-17-17" Ken Janeczko posted HHL Rhine upbound near Detroit, MI carrying tower segments. I gather from the name "Rhine" that these HHL ships are importing windmill pieces from Germany.


Screenshot (source)
One of three photos posted by Bill Payne
More windmill pieces coming into the the Port of Ogdensburg on 7-7-18.
Bill Payne http://www.watertowndailytimes.com/.../wind-turbine-parts...
[At first I missed all of the blades already unloaded on the land. Tower segments must be a bulky (light) load because the bow bulb is partially out of the water even the ship is loaded.]
Four of the photos posted by John Handley:

1

2

4

5
Betsy Cook-Kelly posted two photos with the comment: "How often do you see two ships coming at you side by side at the same time?"
Blackburn Jim Never!!!
Betsy Cook-Kelly That's what I thought! I've never seen that. The funny thing was that the heavier ship with the turbine blades was going much faster than the other ship and giving off HUGE waves!
Christian Burns Was great watching it happen, the one in front pretty much pulled over and let it by!
Helen Cooper I heard the captains taking on the radio. The Amstelborg asked permission to pass around Sister Island (just East of Alex. Bay and the G3 Marquis offered to pull up a bit to let her get by.
Charles T. Low Puzzling. I imagine at least that the location near Singer Castle is a good passing zone. In front of Alexandria Bay might not be! I witnessed a freighter similarly pass a much small, slower Caribbean cruise ship once, but why one would be slower here when the speed limits are generally slower than a modern vessel's capability (aren't they?), I can't guess. On that previous occasion, the request was to "pass on two whistles" which is standard for those familiar with sound signals. The cruise ship captain took a while to figure out what was being asked of him, i.e. he needed to slow if the maneuver were to succeed - the freighter officer was very polite and patient.
Bob Gates The Amstelborg was moving I was running 22 mph took me from Clayton to Cedar point to over take here we we talking at the time how fast she was going.
Thomas LeFaivre I thought the big ships had a 6kt speed limit on the St. Lawrence.
Mark Leet Nope
Charles T. Low Mark Leet But there are speed limits, varying for different zones, clearly marked on nautical charts, sometimes varying for upbound vs. downbound vessels. I had assumed that most modern ships could achieve those speeds (up to 13 knots in some areas?) - there was a day when some of the older lakers could not - in which case why the occasion to overtake?
Mark Leet Speeds are controlled by the seaway based on several variables, some vessels don't have very much fine control, so to not go over they may have to keep 3knts below, so following such a ship for 10-12hrs can add time and $ to the journey.
Betsy Cook-Kelly That makes sense...maybe the Amstelborg wasn't actually going faster but the G3 Marquis was slowing down to let them by.
Pam Rider Rose This year it has been quite often
Brian Cameron windmill parts from Germany...

1

2
Howard Maxson commented on Betsy's posting, cropped
Passing Ogdensburg about 11: 15 am

Howard Maxson commented on Betsy's posting, cropped
Passing Ogdensburg about 11am, they must have been racing.
Four of the photos posted by John Handley:

1

2

4

5
Two of the photos posted by BigLift Shipping with the comment: "With the discharge of nacelles for the Merkur offshore wind farm in Eemshaven, The Netherlands, our grand old lady Happy Buccaneer completed her 250th voyage since she was taken into service."

1

2
GreatLakesSeaway
Longshoremen at the port were able to unload three ships within a one-week period, a first, according to OBPA officials. The ships were each carrying wind turbine components.
[It is interesting that there is no dockside track so that a ship's crane can load directly onto a railcar. ]
Bay Crane posted


CarlzBoats has photos of tower segments and windmill blades going upbound on the St. Lawrence Seaway. Also a multipurpose cargo ship that includes windmill parts.

Jean Hemond Flickr of a cargo ship hauling blades. (source) Blades must be light and they could not find any cargo to haul in the hull because it is running high out of the water. Normally the bow bulb would be underwater.

Share:

Featured Post

Copper River & Northwestern Railway and its bridges

Mile 27, Flag Point Bridge: ( Satellite ; Blog ; more below) Mile 28: the bridge no longer exists; Blog Mile 34, Hot Cake Bridge: the bridge...