Ali, G M; Olearczyk, J; Bouferguene, A and Al-Hussein, M (2021) Implementation of combined loading to calculate ground bearing pressure under crawler crane tracks. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 147(7): 04021051, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Modular projects in the construction industry employ high-capacity crawler cranes. Due to the significant increase in the weights of modules in recent years, ensuring the integrity of ground support under the crane tracks is paramount for avoiding collapse, which ultimately results in dire consequences for the workers and the project. Consequently, the first order of business is to determine the expected pressure under the tracks to determine the ground support necessary. Typically, the ground bearing pressure (GBP) is computed using the fundamentals of statistics at the four edges of the crane (left front and rear and right front and rear), assuming the track width is under uniform loading. However, finite-element analysis (FEA) shows that the GBP values vary even for two corners of an edge (widthwise). In contrast to the traditional four-point approach, the present study proposes a new methodology to not only calculate the GBP at all the eight corners of crawler tracks, but also to calculate the GBP anywhere on the track area, which can establish the GBP profile in detail.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | combined loading; crawler crane; finite element analysis; generalized reduced gradient; ground bearing pressure |
| Index terms: | integrity, module, finite element analysis, implementation, construction industry, statistics, loading, methodology |
| Subjects: | engineering analysis, industry analysis, research methods, architectural elements, health safety and environment, contractual arrangements, construction operations, mathematical modelling |
| Topics: | Site Management, Design Practice, Procurement, Research Practice, Health and Safety |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here