Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 21

Thread: Cranes usage

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    South Shields
    Posts
    5,203
    Thanks (Given)
    480
    Thanks (Received)
    6080
    Likes (Given)
    4096
    Likes (Received)
    14782

    Default Re: Cranes usage

    The stupid heavy lift Derrick was designed to be capable of serving two hatches, one forward of it and one aft.images (1).jpeg

    The Thompson Derrick crane we had on the beaveroak, built on the Tyne in 1965.
    Beaveroak-1965.jpg
    Rgds
    J.A.

  2. Thanks Doc Vernon thanked for this post
  3. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Torquay
    Posts
    11,467
    Thanks (Given)
    3440
    Thanks (Received)
    7758
    Likes (Given)
    11953
    Likes (Received)
    34924

    Default Re: Cranes usage

    #11 John the heavy lift looks like a Stulken, like all good ideas they had their drawbacks for the people who had to use them on board, some things are great on drawing boards!

  4. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    South Shields
    Posts
    5,203
    Thanks (Given)
    480
    Thanks (Received)
    6080
    Likes (Given)
    4096
    Likes (Received)
    14782

    Default Re: Cranes usage

    Yes Ivan,
    The picture is of a stupid Derrick, forgot to put a title to it. Never sailed with one but one guy I sailed with said the worked fine but the lifting hook was a bit of a bigger as when you swing the Derrick between the posts to work the alternate hatch the cargo block was designed to topple over the head of the derrick which it sometimes failed to do. Any ex garrisons of Liverpool guys should be able to provide better info on there workings as there heavy lift ship had two of them did they not.
    Rgds
    J.A.

  5. Likes Doc Vernon liked this post
  6. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    Macclesfield
    Posts
    2
    Thanks (Given)
    1
    Thanks (Received)
    4
    Likes (Given)
    5
    Likes (Received)
    4

    Default Re: Cranes usage

    Hi Mike,

    A bit late to the party, but here goes... They may be Thompson Speed Cranes, but to me they look much more like Velle swinging derricks. The shape of the crosstrees on the mast, and the crossed derrick head strops were typical of Velle. Jebsens had a series of bulk carriers built in the 1970's with these derricks. 25,000 tonne bulkers with five holds. They were all built in Japan, and could be rigged to operate grabs as well as general cargo. They were cheaper than electro-hydraulic cranes of the era, but were a nightmare to operate, especially when rigged for grabs. Miles and miles of wire, and an unbelievable system for opening and closing the grabs, which required adjustment every 4 or 5 hours as the wires stretched. also both the winches and the control system were hydraulic, so the masthouses were always swimming in hydraulic oil. I've only seen them with a 15 tonne SWL, but I suppose they could be designed for greater loads. The way the gear is rigged in the photo, it is with two derricks rigged in tandem with a spreader beam for sharing the load. The Velle swinging derricks were on a fixed gooseneck, so could only operate one cargo hold. Clearly these two were located at the forward and aft ends of one hold. Hope that helps.

  7. Thanks Keith Tindell, Ivan Cloherty, Doc Vernon thanked for this post
  8. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Torquay
    Posts
    11,467
    Thanks (Given)
    3440
    Thanks (Received)
    7758
    Likes (Given)
    11953
    Likes (Received)
    34924

    Default Re: Cranes usage

    #14 Better late than never Mike, thanks for the input, the Thompson and the Velle were pretty much the same, I think at one time there was a patent dispute because of the similiarites, don't know whether anything ever came of it.

    Like shore cranes they had to be re-rigged for grabbing duties, but didn't lose as much as a shore crane in the total % of lifting capacity, as with the slew rings or heels being fitted to the vessel permanently there was very little likely hood of them tipping over, Where-as a 100 tonne rated crawler crane was limited to a maximum lift circa 12 tonnes including grab and contents when rigged for grabbing duties.

  9. Thanks David Ross Cope thanked for this post
    Likes Bill Morrison liked this post
  10. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    Macclesfield
    Posts
    2
    Thanks (Given)
    1
    Thanks (Received)
    4
    Likes (Given)
    5
    Likes (Received)
    4

    Default Re: Cranes usage

    Hi, John,
    Stulken heavy lift derricks were actually a very successful design, with lifting capacity going up to around 300 tonnes (I think), and, as you say, being able to operate two cargo holds. They were popular in the 1960's through to the 1980's. Blue Funnel had them on their Priam class, built in the late 1960's, and UASC had a fleet of, I think, 45 K class general cargo ships fitted with a 105 tonne Stulken serving holds 2 and 3. They were fast enough to use for 40' containers. Unfortunately their ability to operate two holds was their Achilles heel - the derrick head block was offset from the centreline of the boom, so that the derrick could be swung through the vertical, and the cargo hook block would pass by the heel of the derrick. Unfortunately for this to work, the ship had to be upright, and the derrick boom had to be exactly fore and aft. The correct alignment of the boom had to be established with quite a low boom angle (say 60 degrees), and then the boom is topped up to around 85 degrees. If this is done sharply enough, the momentum of the hook block would carry it through the vertical, and then you would lower the boom to operate the other cargo hold. However, if the boom was not exactly fore and aft, the hook block would hit the boom, and not go over. An unsuspecting operator would then try to straighten the boom up (slew left or slew right), and the slewing winches had so much inertia, that they would keep running longer than needed. As at this point the boom is nearly vertical, the end result is that the slewing purchase just pulled down on the boom head, and bent the boom. UASC were repairing these booms at a rate of 2 or 3 a year, all for the same reason. I remember being involved in one repair, where they hired a big mobile crane to place the concrete weights for the load testing after repairs. The test went OK, but before they finished removing the concrete blocks, the crew decided to position the derrick for the other hold, and made the same mistake again, this time in spades, as they slewed so much, they tore the offshore masthead swivel and block arrangement clean off the bipod mast, the derrick then dropped and swung out over the side at a great rate of knots, hitting the other bipod mast (bending the derrick again). and the other masthead swivel and block, still attached by wires to the boom head, kept swinging round and wiped out the mobile crane on the dock. Definately NOT a happy ending...

    The Stulken derrick was designed by Blohm + Voss, Hamburg, but they eventually ceased production, and transferred the rights to a division of theirs called Barthels + Luders. I met their Service Engineer in Shanghai in around 2003, on a repair of a 250 tonne Stulken (bent boom, as usual). He showed me a list of all the ships ever fitted with Stulken derricks, and he was crossing off all those that had been scrapped. He had about 5 left on his list, and he said that when they were all finally scrapped, he could retire. Very nice guy - hope he's enjoying his retirement.
    DRC.

  11. Thanks Ivan Cloherty thanked for this post
    Likes Bill Morrison, Brett Hayes liked this post
  12. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    77
    Thanks (Given)
    9
    Thanks (Received)
    53
    Likes (Given)
    107
    Likes (Received)
    249

    Default Re: Cranes usage

    Not sure what make these are but a good example of how not to use them
    loading_1.jpg
    loading_2.jpg
    loading_3.jpg
    Last edited by Malcolm Lawrence; 15th April 2020 at 10:32 AM.

  13. Thanks happy daze john in oz thanked for this post
  14. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Torquay
    Posts
    11,467
    Thanks (Given)
    3440
    Thanks (Received)
    7758
    Likes (Given)
    11953
    Likes (Received)
    34924

    Default Re: Cranes usage

    #17. Not sure I'd be happy to work with that rig, looks like a place where self preservation is not a prime concern.

    The notice on the trailer reminds of a couple of girls I danced with.

  15. Likes Malcolm Lawrence liked this post
  16. #19
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    South Shields
    Posts
    5,203
    Thanks (Given)
    480
    Thanks (Received)
    6080
    Likes (Given)
    4096
    Likes (Received)
    14782

    Default Re: Cranes usage

    The best ship board cranes I sailed with were the three munck traveling gantry cranes fitted to C.P.'s forest products vessels. When loading forest products they had a 4wire lifting arrangements for the timber heads attached to which was the peco attachment. This coupling three rolls of paper at a time with expanding prongs that went into the centers of the rolls, think each roll of craft liner, directory or newsprint roll weighed about 5 tons. The peck head could rotate 90degrees to the timber head (spreader) that it was attached to and had its own electric motor powered by a supply line from the cranes hoisting trolley. The peck head could also lift about 10 bales of pulp at a time as well as packaged timber. The cabin trolley with all the lifting winches etc. Travelled side to side underneath the gantry and folding arms allowed the trolley to go out over the ships side. SWL was 30 tons and each crane weighed in the region of 200 tons. The cadets job was daily before the start of cargo work was to test all the limit switches on each crane, this was done by driving the crane full ahead whilst simultaneously going hard to port and starboard, testing slow down and stop limits working before the trolley reached the end of the arms and came off the rails and also the fore and aft travel limits to ensure the cranes did not crash into each other.
    Apart from forest products we were also equipped to grab discharge bulk phosphate. The hydraulic operated grabs were stored at port moody where we discharged the Jacksonville loaded phosphate. For this the 4 wire timber hoist arrangements were run off and a two wire yoke arrangements was fitted. These homes and wires were carried on board all the time and every time we changed from timber to bulk the wires were greased, again a cadets job. Whatever lifting arrangements were fitted you had to ensure all wires were of equal length.
    The length between to legs of the crane was the same length as each of the three slabs of the hatch covers and as the cranes had roofs fitted as well as sliding sections that went out over the arms, along with roll down curtains on the fore and aft ends of the cranes, this meant that by opening and stacking on the others slabs just one slab, you could work paper and pulp cargoes in rain. The hatch slabs (3 each side of the centre line) were jacked up from there stowed position to run on rails and could be moved fore and aft on these rails by attaching a continuous chain drive to them.
    All very impressing but a bleddy work up especially after completing discharge of bulk in port moody and having to get one hatch and crane ready for timber work in 4 hours to start in Vancouver. If starting on Vancouver island in say nanaimo it was a much leisurely job.
    Rgds
    J.A.

  17. Thanks happy daze john in oz thanked for this post
    Likes Tony Taylor liked this post
  18. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    CHESTER LE STREET
    Posts
    2,326
    Thanks (Given)
    699
    Thanks (Received)
    1255
    Likes (Given)
    12937
    Likes (Received)
    8310

    Default Re: Cranes usage

    is that sign a subliminal message to those going ashore
    Last edited by Mike Hall; 16th April 2020 at 08:58 AM.

  19. Likes Malcolm Lawrence liked this post
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •