The main purpose of this report is to investigate flaws within Cornelis Tromp 25T lemniscate crane upper arm joint. This is done in order to figure out why the joint structure is experiencing significant crack propagation and what potentially could have led to a structural joint failure and death of an operator within a crane of the same model.

Assessment is performed by simulating stress distribution within the problematic joint structure and assessing high-cycle fatigue damage accumulation around its welds. Loading conditions affecting crane upper arm are established through multi-body dynamic simulations, which are meant to replicate operation of a lemniscate crane. Multi-body dynamic model is verified for its accuracy using available crane operation measurement data. Loads are acquired within the time domain and include temporal effects of luffing, slewing and hoisting operations as well as pontoon motion.

Fatigue analysis is performed to evaluate damage accumulation within the tubular joint structure of the crane upper arm. A detailed shell finite element model is established to acquire time-dependent stress responses. During stress evaluation stage - a particularly large stress concentration has been observed at the joint brace saddle position. To assess which method best simulate damage accumulation in the joint structure - three specific fatigue assessment approaches are tested: nominal stress approach, hot-spot stress approach and multi-axial fatigue approach. Nominal and hot-spot stress approaches are evaluated and compared to determine how inclusion of stress concentration effects into fatigue assessment influence damage accumulation results. Result comparison has shown a large disparity in results with hot-spot stress approach, indicating that the method capable of determining locations of dangerous stress accumulation, in relation to what has been observed in the real structure.

Evaluation is performed to determine whether multi-axial fatigue assessment is needed to improve calculation results of fatigue damage accumulation.
Based on stress direction properties within the analysed structure - most favorable multi-axial fatigue assessment approach (capable of analysing proportional stress responses) is used. Multi-axial fatigue assessment method results are then compared with results of conventional hot-spot stress approach to evaluate the differences in damage accumulation rate. Analysis results have shown that both methods are capable of determining locations of critical points with present disparity within magnitude of damage accumulation. This indicates that hot-spot stress fatigue approach, which uses Von Mises stress, is more conservative out of two methods. Fatigue analysis has also presented that original joint structure is inherently flawed, as its stress concentration locations are not easily accessible without crane disassembly and its structural capacity has been underestimated during design stage.

Finally methods for extending operational life of crane upper arm structure are evaluated. Three methods for reducing stress within the structure are assessed: increase of structural capacity, stress redistribution and load reduction. Increase of structural capacity is performed by adjusting thickness of relevant joint elements, with optimal thickness being established using a sensitivity analysis algorithm, which simultaneously acquires combined thickness setup for multiple joint elements - making the joint capable of surviving predetermined fatigue life. Stress redistribution approach is implemented by producing an alternative upper arm joint design, which could be exchanged with the problematic original joint during crane refurbishment. Load reduction approach is performed to investigate whether it would be possible to increase fatigue life of the original joint structure without affecting work efficiency, by only adjusting crane motion profile within multi-body dynamic simulation environment. All three methods are quantified and compared through fatigue damage factor results acquired using multi-axial fatigue assessment method. Result comparison has shown that joint redesign is the most preferred approach due to its ability to efficiently improve fatigue life of the structure without significant structural weight increase, while exposing any potential points for crack initiation to locations easily accessible for inspection and repair.