Financial Summary

Financial Summary:

The crane design has been broken down into many sections which either perform specific roles or group together parts which will be sub-contracted through different sources and companies for efficient logistical operation and to ensure costs are saved by mass purchase.

We will now break down the financial summary into the following stages to build a picture of costing considerations used:

·         Part Costing

·         Crane Kit Costing

·         Sub-Contracts

·         Further Considerations

Pricing of Parts

Below is the cost breakdown of all of the crane components. Each component is priced per unit and all components are made from 7075T6 Aluminium unless stated:

Top Section

·         I Beam – h=135mm   w=150mm  5000mm                                                             £214.51                                 www.aluminiumwarehouse.co.uk

Side Sections

·         Side Section – 150mm x 150mm x 3mm                                                                  £155.52                                 www.aluminiumwarehouse.co.uk

·         Corner Joint – Each unit would require 2 lots of the following:

-          2 channel extrusions (C – Shaped)   4 x £11.46 = £45.84

-          1  7075T6 Al Sheet                                    2 x £2.09 = £4.18              

-          Fabrication Cost                                                        £80                         £130.02

        www.aluminiumwarehouse.co.uk

Quad pods

·         Foot Holders – 50mm x 3mm                                                                                      £12.82                                   www.aluminiumwarehouse.co.uk

·         Centre Mounts – 165mm x 165mm x 5mm                                                           £10.37                   www.aluminiumwarehouse.co.uk

Lifting tackle

·          Bow shackles – STEEL – 2 at a working load 2.3 tonnes                                   £8.38                     www.machinemart.co.uk

·         Lifting hooks – STEEL – 4.5 inches – 2 tonne working load                              £35.89                   www.ecrater.co.uk

·         D rings – STEEL – 2 inches – 1.1 tonne working load                                          £1.95                                     www.simplyscuba.co.uk

Pins & Clips

·         Steel pins (top beam) – 4 at £0.30                                                                             £1.20                                     www1.mcsdirect.com

·         Steel pins (assembly pins) – 12 at £0.33                                                                  £3.96                                     www1.mcsdirect.com

·         R clips - 40mm -16 at £0.10                                                                                           £1.60                                     www1.mcsdirect.com

Lifting Harnesses

·         Lifting slings – 4m with 2m lift – 2 tonne capability – 4 at £5.10                     £20.40   www.scaffolding-direct.co.uk

·         Lifting straps – 2m – 2 tonne capability – 3 at                                                       £3.95   

www.megatradestore.com

·         Ratchet strap -  38mm x 6m – 2 at £9.13                                                                 £18.26                                   www.power-tools-pro

Total Cost Per Kit:

A full list of parts and components can be found in a table at Annex of the Appendices. The full price for one unit in parts works out to be £874.33 and the remaining overheads include:

-          Part Fabrication -      £240 / Unit

-          Labour Costs -           £50 / Unit

-          Packaging -                 £5 / Unit

The overheads include provision of materials for each process and completion of each process also bringing the total cost per kit to £1169.33 per Unit.

To ensure our Company remains profitable we will put a 40% profit margin onto the RRP meaning that the modular crane kit can be offered at a per unit price of £1637.06.

Sub-Contracts:

The majority of the parts for our crane come from material suppliers in an inoperable condition and require fabrication. For this reason we will be using sub-contracted companies to carry out the following roles:

-          Fabrication (welding of components into parts) – local company.

-          Material Suppliers (e.g. www.aluminiumwarehouse.co.uk)

-          Kit Assembly / Packaging – local company

By using sub-contracts we are able to provide discounted rates to the unit price for high demand orders based on requirements.

Further Considerations:

The Company are able to compliment the current crane kits if successful at tender by offering a range of additional lifting tackle, spares and servicing packages. The basic crane kit meets all of the design brief points to good effect and can be compared to similar products already on sale within various markets:

Competitive Company Comparison:

“Lifting Safety” is a nationally recognised company who retail a full range of small, medium and large Aluminium gantry cranes, capable of lifting between 0.5 and 5 tonnes. The target users include vehicle mechanic companies, building sites and other low level industrial type uses. It could be easily adapted to go to tender for this design brief.

In comparison to the Taurus Integrated Technologies crane kit it is less functional due to its limited leg adjustability and does not include any lifting tackle or harnessing to move loads. It is also less durable due to its grade of aluminium and is vulnerable to salt corrosion; adversely affecting its lifespan within the role we can cater for.

The most significant comparison is the cost. “Lifting Safety” produce a small gantry crane of similar dimensions which has a RRP of £2100 per unit. This is a difference of £462.94 per unit meaning that if a 3^rd World Country were to require 10 units, we could offer a saving of £4629.40 without considering the reduced unit price we could offer for a bulk demand.

Fig. 1 – A table showing the range of gantry cranes available from ‘Lifting Safety’ and the price per unit.

Conclusion:

By finding suppliers of standard parts and materials and using sub-contracts with local companies, Taurus Integrated Technologies have produced a highly functional, competitively priced Emergency Crane kit which will be of high demand to any potential users.

Company Reference:

http://www.liftingsafety.co.uk/product/aluminium-gantry-crane-3085.html#pricing

Stress Analysis of Foot Poles

Stress analysis was carried out for the foot poles, modelling the quadpod centre as a built in joint and the tube as a beam. The load was considered as acting upwards from the floor, as it would in a reaction force. The weight of the part itself was considered negligible.

Deflection was calculated first:

Which comes out at 0.5mm and will not affect the performance of the part.

Then max stress:

Which shows it will not fail.

Stress analysis of Top Beam

The top beam was analysed to find the maximum deflection and maximum stress, as shown below.

I = Second Moment of Area and y = distance between load and COM of beam.

Yield Stress is 503 MPa, so the beam will not permanently deform under load

In this case y represents deflection.

This small amount of deflection will not affect the operation of the crane.

Decision matrix for material

 The Pugh decision matrix shows how the factors considered for material choice were weighted and scored. Aluminium is our chosen material.

Factor	Weighting Factor	Steel	Titanium	Auminum	Composites
Strength / Weight Ratio	3	-1	1	0	2
Youngs Modulus	2	1	2	0	-1
Density	2	-1	2	1	0
Cost	4	3	-2	2	-3
Durability	3	-2	2	1	0
	TOTAL	3	9	13	-8
	Position	3	2	1	4

Minutes of Group Meeting 6/12/11

The group met today to present and discuss the work which we had done over the past week, select a concept and to allocate tasks for the coming week. Attending were:

·         Dave Brown

·         Ross Catchpole

·         Rich Brennan

·         James Golding

·         James Flanagan

 The group agreed on a system by which to score the concepts which were drawn out, considering each category and weighting it as to how important the factor was in our design. Each idea was then given a score between -3 and 3 for each category, and the concept with the highest score will be developed to become our final design. To clarify, portability was defined as how easily the crane could be broken down and moved, and mobility was based on the range of positions the load could be deposited in. It was also agreed that the weak link and carrying handle concepts will be incorporated into the design.

	Weighting (multiplication factor)	Gantry Crane	Tripod with Adjustable Legs	Tripod with Rubble weighted Base	Spider Crane
Portability	4	2	0	-1	1
Mobility	3	0	1	-1	1
Cost	4	2	1	0	-1
Ease of Manufacture	3	2	0	1	-1
Ease of Use	2	1	0	-1	1
Total Score		24	7	-6	2
Position		1	2	4	3

The Gantry Crane concept was the clear winner; however it was felt that it was not perfect and 

improvements could be made. These mostly related to stability and adjustability and were agreed on. They have been incorporated into the design sketch which will also be uploaded to this blog.

James Flanagan presented the research which he had done into materials (which will also be uploaded) and it was decided overall that aluminium was the best choice to make the crane out of due to its corrosion resistance, ease of working and good strength to weight ratio relative to its price. Titanium and composites were both superior in their strength to weight ratio however their price, both as raw materials and the increased cost of manufacture related to working with them, made them a less than ideal choice for the design.

Ross Catchpole is to look into joint designs suitable for the chosen concept this week and discuss them with Dave Brown to draw into the design in time for the group meeting next week, due to the huge number of possibilities available when all concepts were considered in research this week.

Tasks to be done and presented and the next group meeting:

Ross Catchpole – Research harnesses and Load connections suitable for the crane

Dave Brown – Sketch Final Design (with joints in)
                        Start CAD of design

Rich Brennan – Start stress analysis of design and determine required second moment of area.

James Flanagan – Assist with stress analysis and CAD.
Find strength values for different types of aluminium and their limitations.
Research coatings.

James Golding – Research winch and pulley systems suitable for crane. Include electric winches and their power sources.

The next whole group meeting will be on 12/12/11. 

Current crane products

GANTRY:

This crane works by winching the weight up and sliding it along the top boom. It would be broken down and moved to the problem area and reassembled. Early possible problems I would like to investigate include; when the top boom is over four metres long will it deflect under a weight of 1000kg, are the feet stable enough and would it be better to have more legs on each end.  When at an end, would the supports be strong enough and would it cause the other end to be lifted?

SPIDER:

The spider crane mechanically moves to the required position, it then winches the load up and lifts it, it then carries it to the required area. Initial areas to investigate with this is how much this would cost, this could be a massive weakness with this design. Mechanically my worries include; not being heavy enough on the base causing it to tip over when lifting things with the crane head, would this design be able to get over serious obsticles associated with rubble covered areas.

JIB        

                                                             

The jib crane uses a fixed body, with a swinging arm to move what it has lifted it up. If used in this situation it would have to be carried to the desired point and the body would have to be dug into a solid foundation. Main concerns which I will have to investigate include; the crane being to heavy, not being able to dig the base into the ground because of the rubble and whether or not it would be pulled over when dug into the ground by the 1000kg weight being lifted up.

Calculations required to ensure quality:

Stress:  σ/y= M/I= E/R

Buckling: P_critical = 4π2EI/L^2 

Bending deflection: -EI(d^2 v)/〖dz〗^2 

Shear force: dM/dx

Important to ensure that at every point do the maximum stress equation. This will prove whether or not the material chosen will be successful. It is important to me that these equations are all considered to ensure that the crane will avoid failure.

Research - Types of Crane

Slide showing different types of existing crane

Minutes of Group Meeting 28/11/11

An initial group meeting was held to issue tasks to all of the group members, discuss some initial concepts and create the blog on which to post our work.

Those attending were:

·         Ross Catchpole

·         Richard Brennan

·         Dave Brown

·         James Golding

·         James Flanagan

It was decided that the following people will carry out the following tasks and present their work/findings to the group on 5/12/11 at the next group meeting, as well as posting it on the group blog.

James Golding - Submit Gant Chart onto Blog
                          Submit Group roles to Gareth
                          Research winch / lifting systems and their pro’s and con’s

James Flanagan – Research into material types. Justify choices of materials for different components of possible concepts.

Richard Brennan - Research current crane systems and consider what calculations will be required with different concepts.

Ross Catchpole - Costs of crane system case studies
                            Consider costs involved with tender
                               Research joint types for possible concepts

Dave Brown -      Sketch Concepts and consider pro’s and con’s of each
                           Research size and weight restrictions on crane

The decision was made during the meeting to move the project forward quickly in order to allow maximum time to analyse the design and solve any problems we are to be faced with.