See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/273432695

Algorithm of Crane Selection for Heavy Lifts

Article  in  Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering · January 2011

DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)CP.1943-5487.0000065

CITATIONS READS
16 2,613

5 authors, including:

Di Wu Yuanshan Lin
Shanghai Jiao Tong University 9 PUBLICATIONS   52 CITATIONS   
33 PUBLICATIONS   140 CITATIONS   
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

Xin Wang
Ocean University of China
38 PUBLICATIONS   89 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Yuanshan Lin on 22 May 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Algorithm of Crane Selection for Heavy Lifts
Di Wu, M.ASCE1; Yuanshan Lin, M.ASCE2; Xin Wang, M.ASCE3; Xiukun Wang4; and Shunde Gao5

Abstract: Lifting capacity charts are tabulated and provided to operators and practitioners by mobile crane manufacturers. These charts
are structured based on predetermined crane configurations, which consist of boom/jib length, lifting radius, main boom angle to ground,
and jib angle to ground or its offset to its main boom centerline. It is a tedious job that lifting planners select cranes for construction
projects based on a large number of lifting capacity charts. This paper presents a newly developed algorithm for selecting mobile cranes
on construction sites, which takes into account the lifting capacity, the geometrical characteristics of the crane, the dimensions of
equipments and riggings, and the ground bearing pressure. The algorithm is incorporated into a three-dimensional 共3D兲 computer-aided
system that integrates crane selection module, crane modeling module, 3D-simulation module, 3D computer-aided design modeling
module, rigging calculation module, and data management module. At last, a case is represented in order to demonstrate the use of the
developed algorithm and to illustrate its essential features.
DOI: 10.1061/共ASCE兲CP.1943-5487.0000065
CE Database subject headings: Cranes; Lifting; Pressure; Algorithms.
Author keywords: Crane selection; Heavy lift; Ground bearing pressure; Mobile crane; CAD.

Introduction tedious activity, a number of crane selection algorithms and com-

Mobile crane operations are critical to timely and safe completion
of construction as cranes are involved in various activities across
a construction site and a large number of building components are
installed by using cranes. Unlike tower cranes that are situated at
a fixed location and perform all operations within a given build-
ing zone, mobile cranes are assigned to specific lifting tasks 共e.g.,
steel erection, roof installation, etc.兲 and move across a construc-
tion site to perform those tasks 共Tantisevi and Akinci 2008兲. A
proper crane must be selected to perform lifting tasks. Thus, the
crane selection is a central element of a project in crane’s life
cycle as an appropriately selected crane contributes to the effi-
ciency, timeliness, and profitability of the project. If the correct
crane selection and configuration is not made, cost and safety
implications might be created 共Hanna 1994兲.
Since selecting an appropriate crane is a time consuming and
1
Research Associate Professor, School of Computer Science, Dalian
Univ. of Technology, Dalian, Liaoning 116024, People’s Republic of
China. E-mail: wudi@dlut.edu.cn
2
Doctoral Candidate, School of Computer Science, Dalian Univ. of
Technology, Dalian, Liaoning 116024, People’s Republic of China 共cor-
responding author兲. E-mail: Linyuanshan2008@126.com
3
Research Associate Professor, School of Mechanical Enginexeering,
Dalian Univ. of Technology, Dalian, Liaoning 116024, People’s Republic
of China. E-mail: Wangxbd21@163.com
4
Research Professor, School of Computer Science, Dalian Univ. of
Technology, Dalian, Liaoning 116024, People’s Republic of China.
E-mail: Jsjwxk@dlut.edu.cn
5
Senior Engineer, School of Mechanical Engineering, Dalian Univ. of
Technology, Dalian, Liaoning 116024, People’s Republic of China.
E-mail: Gaoshunde@163.com
Note. This manuscript was submitted on March 1, 2009; approved on
April 28, 2010; published online on December 15, 2010. Discussion pe-
riod open until June 1, 2011; separate discussions must be submitted for
individual papers. This paper is part of the Journal of Computing in
Civil Engineering, Vol. 25, No. 1, January 1, 2011. ©ASCE, ISSN
0887-3801/2011/1-57–65/$25.00.
puter applications were developed to aid practitioners in the se-
lection and utilization of cranes. Some researchers used statistical
methods or machine learning methods to select crane type and
crane model 共Abraham 1990; Hanna and Lotfallah 1999; Mahal-
ingam et al. 2000; Sawhney and Mund 2001, 2002; Mahalingam
et al. 2007兲, while several developed systems used three-
dimensional 共3D兲 graphics and simulation technique 共Hornaday et
al. 1993; Dharwadkar et al. 1994; Varghese et al. 1997; Zhang et
al. 1999; Kang et al. 2004; Moselhi et al. 2004; Al-Hussein et al.
2006; Hammad et al. 2006; Reddy et al. 2007; Tantisevi and
Akinci 2008兲. Other developed approaches targeted selecting mo-
bile cranes and determining their locations at a job site 共Dharwad-
kar et al. 1994; Haas and Lin 1995; Lin and Haas 1996; Al-
Hussein et al. 1999, 2001, 2005兲. These selection approaches
were based on the calculation with tabulated lifting capacity
charts, and they considered selection constraints, such as crane
capacity, reaching height, clearance between crane, and objects
around crane. The clearance between the boom/jib and the equip-
ment and the ground bearing pressure are also important factors
that affect lifting safety, but they are rarely considered in the
existing approaches. Furthermore, these methods mainly focused
on the selection of telescoping boom truck mounted, but the se-
lection of a lattice boom crane with a wide range of boom/jib
combinations, which will lead to complexity of clearance calcu-
lation, was seldom studied. The algorithm discussed in this paper
builds on the previous approaches for a crane selection and takes
into account the lifting capacity, clearance boom or jib to equip-
ment, ground bearing pressure, and complicated boom/jib combi-
nations of lattice boom crane. The algorithm is incorporated into
a computer system that integrates equipment and environment
drawing, rigging selection and calculation, crane selection, crane
modeling, lifting simulation, and lift plan generation. Some pa-
rameters of equipment and environment drawing and rigging se-
lection and calculation module, such as dimension of equipment,
rigging attachments weight, etc., are the inputs of crane selection
algorithm, and the outputs of the proposed algorithm are the in-

JOURNAL OF COMPUTING IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2011 / 57

Downloaded 16 Nov 2011 to 202.118.67.103. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit http://www.ascelibrary.org

Fig. 1. System structure of the proposed algorithm
puts of crane modeling, lifting simulation, and lift plan genera-
tion. This paper focuses primarily on the selection module and its
algorithm to support an efficient search for the most suitable
crane configurations and their associated lift settings. Detailed
discussions on the approach and crane selection module devel-
oped in 3D lifting simulation system are provided in the next
section.
System Structure of Proposed Algorithm
The system structure of the proposed algorithm is shown in Fig.
1, which is composed of three components: input, process, and
output. The core of the developed algorithm is process compo-
nent, which is implemented by a system database and three ex-
ecution units: lifting capacity calculation, clearance calculation,
and ground bearing pressure calculation. The lifting capacity cal-
culation is responsible for checking whether lift capacity setting
meets given lifting capacity constraints, such as lifting weight,
reach height, and working radius; the clearance calculation is re-
sponsible for checking whether the clearance boom or jib to
equipment is greater than allowable clearance under various
boom/jib combinations; and the ground bearing pressure calcula-
tion is responsible for checking whether the ground bearing pres-
sure of crane is less than ground support capacity. Each execution
unit can eliminate some incompetent lifting capacity settings. The
system database is like the data provider of these execution units,
and it consists of four databases, including lift capacity, geometry
of cranes, center of gravity, and rigging equipment. The lift ca-
pacity database stores the load capacity charts for the mobile
crane, varying in capacities from 50 to 1,600 t, providing lift
capacity setting for the lifting capacity calculation. The geometry
database contains dimensions of crane parts such as crawlers,
superstructure, carriage, slewing ring, mast, boom, jib, and so on,
providing dimensions of data for calculation of the clearance and
ground bearing pressure. The center of gravity database contains
the weight and the relative center of gravity of crane parts, pro-
viding reliable data for the center of gravity of a crane calculation
and ground bearing pressure calculation. The rigging database
contains information on the rigging equipment including slings,
shackles, and spreader beams, providing data for lifting capacity
calculation. The system provides practitioner an interface to im-
port or update the crane data and rigging data.
The working principle of the proposed algorithm is, first, ac-
58 / JOURNAL OF COMPUTING IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2011
Downloaded 16 Nov 2011 to 202.118.67.103. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit http://www.ascelibrary.org
cording to lift capacity setting retrieved from lift capacity data-
base together with some parameters from the rigging database,
the algorithm calculates the rated lifting height, working radius,
and lifting weight and checks if they meet requirements from an
input. Then, the clearance calculation fetches crane dimensions
and equipment dimensions from a crane geometry database, cal-
culates the clearance between boom/jib and equipment, and
checks if it is greater than the allowable clearance. Finally, the
ground bearing pressure calculation unit calculates the overall
center of gravity of the crane and the equipment and the ground
bearing pressure of the crane and checks if the pressure is less
than ground support capacity. If one lift capacity setting passes
the three tests, then a feasible crane configuration comes out. In a
word, based on the lifting capacity, dimensions of crane, equip-
ment, and rigging, the algorithm can retrieve from databases to
determine all technically feasible lift settings, which satisfy all
specified lifting capacity, clearances between boom/jib, and the
equipment and ground bearing pressure. Moreover, all technically
feasible lift settings are listed on the output interface “crane con-
figurations” and can be sorted by lift capacity, radius, or boom
length. If all cranes in the database do not satisfy the specified
lifting capacity, clearances boom or jib to the equipment, and
ground bearing pressure, then no crane configuration comes out
according to the user inputs. At the moment, the user is encour-
aged to change his/her inputs or import more other crane data to
the database. The detailed calculation of the proposed algorithm is
presented in later section.
Flowchart and Details of Proposed Algorithms
As mentioned above, the proposed algorithm follows a three-step
process including capacity check, clearance check, and ground
bearing pressure check, as shown in Fig. 2, to determine the tech-
nical feasibility of each lift setting retrieved from the database. It
confirms the lift setting’s feasibility by ensuring that it satisfies
1. The crane’s lifting capacity;
2. The clearances between boom/jib and the equipment; and
3. The ground bearing pressure.
The representations of variables in Fig. 2 are G⬘ = actual total
weight, its value from input interface or default value by calcu-
lating; R⬘ = distance from the slewing centerline to the position of
equipment installed from input interface; H⬘ = desired lifting
height from input interface; C⬘ = allowable clearance between the
boom/jib and the equipment from input interface; GP⬘
= allowable ground bearing pressure from input interface; G
= lifting capacity of crane for certain configuration from capacity
database; R = working radius of crane for certain configuration
from capacity database; C = clearance between the boom/jib and
the equipment, calculated according to the dimensions of the
boom/jib and the equipment; and GP = maximum ground bearing
pressure of crawlers for certain configuration.
Step 1: Verify the Lifting Capacity of the Crane
The task of verifying the lifting capacity of a crane is to deter-
mine the crane’s lifting capacity associated with any given con-
figuration that meets the lifting condition, including lifting
capacity greater than or equal to the total lift weight, working
radius greater than or equal to the distance from the slewing cen-
terline to the position of equipment installed and lifting height

Fig. 2. Flowchart of the proposed algorithm
greater than or equal to the height which the equipment installing
requires.
Lifting Capacity
Crane lift settings are stored in the database along with their
associated gross capacities. These lifting capacities are compared
with the total lifting weights 共G⬘兲, including the equipment
weight 共GL兲, sling weight 共GSL兲, spreader weight 共GSP兲, and hook
weight 共GH兲 共see Fig. 3兲. The values of these weights are from the
database or interface. The crane’s lifting capacity associated with
any given configuration should be greater than or equal to the
total lift weight in order to satisfy Eq. 共1兲
G ⱖ G⬘
where G⬘ = GL + GSL + GSP + GH
Working Radius
As an important factor that affects lift capacity, working radius
共R兲 for a certain lift setting must be greater than R⬘, as shown in
Eq. 共3兲
R ⱖ R⬘
where R⬘ = max共Rs , Rt兲; Rs = distance from the slewing centerline
to the position of equipment stood 共staging location兲; and Rt
= distance from the slewing centerline to the position of equip-
ment installed.
JOURNAL OF COMPUTING IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2011 / 59
Downloaded 16 Nov 2011 to 202.118.67.103. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit http://www.ascelibrary.org
Fig. 3. Gross lifting weights
Lifting Height
As another important factor affecting the lift capacity, lifting
height is calculated under different boom/jib combinations. There
are many types of boom/jib combinations in terms of structure for
lattice boom crane, mainly including main boom, main boom with
fixed jib, and main boom with luffing jib configuration. Detailed
calculations of lifting height for every configuration are elabo-
rated as follows.
Main Boom Configuration
Under the configuration of main boom, the boom system consists
of mast and main boom, and the main boom is mounted to the top
of the superstructure, some distance away from the slewing cen-
terline. The main boom sheave is fixed on the top of boom, where
there are some offsets to centerline of boom. Its simplified struc-
ture for lifting height calculation is shown in Fig. 4
H1 = 冑共L21 + D21兲 − 共R − X兲2 共4兲
H = H1 + Y 共5兲
where the distance between main boom foot and slewing center-
line 共X兲, the distance between the main boom foot and the ground
共Y兲, the main boom length 共L1兲, and the vertical offset of main
boom sheave 共D1兲 are from the database.
共1兲 Main Boom with Fixed Jib
In order to improve the lifting height and working radius, a small
共2兲 jib is usually mounted to the top of the main boom, and the fixed
angle between the main boom and the jib is formed. The small jib
is called fixed jib. The lifting sheave is fixed on the top of the
fixed jib, where there are some offsets to centerline of jib. Its
simplified structure for lifting height calculation is shown in
Fig. 5
共3兲
␥ = 180 − ␪ − arctan 冉 冊
D2
L2
共6兲
T = 冑L21 + 共L22 + D22兲 − 2 ⫻ L1 ⫻ 冑L22 + D22 ⫻ cos ␥ 共7兲
H1 = 冑T2 − 共R − X兲2 共8兲
 D3

R3

(X, Y) R1
(0, 0)

R
Fig. 4. Simplified structure of main boom configuration
Fig. 6. Simplified structure of main boom with luffing jib configu-
ration

H = H1 + Y
where D2 and L2 represent the vertical offset of fixed jib sheave
and the fixed jib length, respectively, which are from the database.
The representations of other symbols are the same as above.
共9兲
Main Boom with Luffing Jib
Like the configuration of a main boom with the fixed jib, a jib
共luffing jib兲 is mounted to the top of the main boom to improve
the lifting height and working radius. The difference is that the
angle between the main boom and the jib is changeable by rotat-
ing the jib around jib foot point. The lifting sheave is fixed on the
top of luffing jib, where there are some offsets to centerline of jib.
Its simplified structure for lifting height calculation is shown in
Fig. 6
R1 = L1 ⫻ cos ␣ 共10兲

H1 = L1 ⫻ sin ␣ 共11兲

R3 = R − X − R1 共12兲

H3 = 冑共L23 + D23兲 − R23 共13兲

H = Y + H1 + H3 共14兲
where ␣ = main boom angle from the database; L3 = luffing jib
length from the database; and D3 = vertical offset of the luffing jib
sheave from the database. Other symbols are the same as above.
The rate lifting height must satisfy Eq. 共16兲
H⬘ = Hob + HL + HL2H + HLMT 共15兲

H ⱖ H⬘ 共16兲
where Hob = distance from equipment bottom to ground when
equipment over the highest obstacle from the input interface;
HL = distance from lugs to bottom of equipment from the equip-
ment file; HL2H = vertical distance from lugs to hook from the
Fig. 5. Simplified structure of main boom with fixed jib configura- input interface; and HLMT = limit height from hook to lifting
tion sheave from the database.

60 / JOURNAL OF COMPUTING IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2011

Downloaded 16 Nov 2011 to 202.118.67.103. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit http://www.ascelibrary.org
 Fig. 7. Calculation of clearance under main boom configuration

Step 2: Verify Clearance of Crane’s Boom and Jib

Generally, the equipment is very large in heavy lift, with a diam-
eter of 4–6 m, even over 10 m. Since the equipment is liable to
collide with the main boom or jib of crane, it is necessary to
calculate the clearance between main boom or jib to equipment
while lifting.
The direct calculation of the minimum distance between the
boom/jib and the equipment is complicated. For various equip-
Fig. 8. Calculation of clearance under main boom with jib configu-
ration
Determining if the clearance between the equipment and the main
boom is enough is equal to determining if the distance from the
point Q to the line Lc is positive. Given the minimum clearance
allowed C⬘, the expression of the line Lc is Eq. 共17兲. The techni-
cally feasible crane configurations must satisfy the Eq. 共18兲

冉 冊
ments in real lifts, one of the methods for calculating the distance
between the boom/jib and the equipment is to calculate the mini- S1 + C⬘
tan ␣ ⫻ x − y − tan ␣ ⫻ X + +Y=0 共17兲
mum distance between meshes of boom/jib and equipment in sin ␣

three dimensions. This method is very accurate, but it needs to
construct 3D models of the boom/jib and the equipment before
calculation and has high computational complexity. This method
is an inappropriate approach in the phase of a crane selection.
Fortunately, the boom/jib and the equipment are coplanar when
the equipment is lifted to the highest position, that is, when the
most possible intersection occurs. Therefore, in the proposed al-
gorithm, first, the most possible intersection point between lifting
equipment and boom/jib can be calculated according to the infor-
mation of the equipment. Then, the calculation of the potential
intersection point to the boom/jib is carried out in two dimen-
sions. If the potential intersection point is underneath the boom/
jib, then the crane configuration will pass the test; otherwise, it
will not.
Main Boom Configuration
As shown in Fig. 7, suppose that under the main boom configu-
ration, given the main boom angle and the equipment, point P is
the potential intersection point during the lifting, and the point
Q共x1 , y 1兲 is the highest point that P can reach during the lifting.
冉 冊
S1 + C⬘
tan ␣ ⫻ x1 − y 1 − tan ␣ ⫻ X + +Y
sin ␣
d= ⱖ 0 共18兲
冑tan2 ␣ + 1
where S1 = one-half height of the main boom, which is from the
database; d = distance from the point Q to the line Lc; x1 = x0; y 1
= y 0 + ⌬H; and ⌬H = change of lifting height.
Main Boom with Jib Configuration
As shown in Fig. 8, under the condition of a main boom with a jib
configuration, the given boom/jib angle, and the equipment, sup-
pose the point P is the potential intersection point during the
lifting, and the point Q共x1 , y 1兲 is the highest point that P can
reach during the lifting. Determining if the clearance of the equip-
ment to the main boom is enough is equal to determining if the
distances of the point Q to the line Lc1 and Lc2 are positive.
Given the minimum clearance allowed C, the expressions of lines
Lc1 and Lc2 are Eqs. 共19兲 and 共20兲. The technically feasible crane
configurations must satisfy Eqs. 共21兲 and 共22兲

tan ␣ ⫻ x − y − tan ␣ ⫻ X + 冉 S1 + C⬘
sin ␣
冊
+Y=0 共19兲

JOURNAL OF COMPUTING IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2011 / 61

Downloaded 16 Nov 2011 to 202.118.67.103. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit http://www.ascelibrary.org
 冉
tan ␤ ⫻ x − y − tan ␤ ⫻ X + L1 ⫻ cos ␣ +
S2 + C⬘
sin ␤
冊
+ Y + L1 ⫻ sin ␣ = 0 共20兲

d1 =
tan ␣ ⫻ x1 − y 1 − tan ␣ ⫻ X + 冉 S1 + C⬘
sin ␣
+Y 冊 ⱖ0 共21兲
冑tan2 ␣ + 1

d2 =
冉
tan ␤ ⫻ x1 − y 1 − tan ␤ ⫻ X + L1 ⫻ cos ␣ +
S2 + C⬘
sin ␤
冊
+ Y + L1 ⫻ sin ␣
ⱖ0 共22兲
冑tan2 ␤ + 1

where ␤ = jib angle from the database; S2 = one-half height of jib = offset of the ith part in direction of crawler, which is the other
boom from the database; and d2 = distance between the point Q component of the whole gravity center of crane on the ground.
and the line Lc2. Center of gravity for each part can be calculated according to
current slewing angle, boom and jib angle to ground, and the data
of each part in the center of gravity database.
Step 3: Verify Ground Bearing Pressure In the crane selection, the ground bearing pressure must satisfy
Eqs. 共27兲 and 共28兲
The vertical load of one unit ground area is called ground bearing
GP = max关max共PIx兲,max共PIIx 兲兴 共27兲
pressure. The diagram of ground bearing pressure for a crawler
crane is shown in Fig. 9, and the ground bearing pressure is
GP ⱕ GP⬘ 共28兲
calculated as follows:
1. When 兩e兩 ⬍ L / 6

PIx =
Gg
2bL
1+冉2w
B
冊冉1+
12ex
L2
冊 Case Study

冉 冊冉 冊
Actual Case
Gg 2w 12ex
PIIx = 1− 1+ 共23兲 The proposed algorithm was integrated into a computer-aided de-
2bL B L2
sign system called 3D lifting simulation system, which has been
2. When 兩e兩 ⬎ L / 6 applied by Sinopec. To illustrate its effectiveness and usability, an

冉 冊
actual case is presented. The case here involves the installation of
Gg 2w

冉 冊
PIx = 2 1+ 共L − 3兩e兩 + 兩x兩兲 atmospheric tower of Refinery and Ethylene Project in the east of
L B Quanzhou, Fujian, China. The lifting equipment weighs 392 t and
9b − 兩e兩
2 has a diameter and a height of 6.85 and 54.4 m, respectively. The
equipment is to be lifted from staging A to targeted Location B
Gg
冉 2w
冊 which is 6.6 m high, as shown in Figs. 10 and 11. The most

冉 冊
PIIx = 2 1− 共L − 3兩e兩 + 兩x兩兲 共24兲 suitable crane configuration needs to be selected.
L B
9b − 兩e兩 Before using the selection module, the weight and the key
2 dimensions of lifting equipment are entered first, which limits the
The variables in Fig. 9 and Eqs. 共23兲 and 共24兲 are listed in
Table 1.
The whole gravity center of crane on the ground is calculated
as Eqs. 共25兲 and 共26兲
b

兺i Giei
e= 共25兲
兺i Gi
w
B

兺i Giwi
w= 共26兲
兺i Gi
where Gi = ith part weight from the database; wi = offset of the ith
part perpendicular to direction of crawler, which is one compo-
nent of the whole gravity center of crane on the ground; and ei Fig. 9. Diagram of ground bearing pressure for crawlers

62 / JOURNAL OF COMPUTING IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2011

Downloaded 16 Nov 2011 to 202.118.67.103. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit http://www.ascelibrary.org
Table 1. Definitions of Variables in Fig. 9 and Eqs. 共23兲 and 共24兲
Type Variables Representation From
Parameters retrieved from the database L The length of the region where crawler is pressed Geometry database
b The width of crawler Geometry database
B The distance between the two crawlers Geometry database
Temporary variables PxI The ground bearing pressure on x for the I crawler Calculation
PxII The ground bearing pressure on x for the II crawler Calculation
Gg The total resultant force consisting of the whole weight of Calculation
crane and the vertical load of equipment
w The offset perpendicular to direction of crawler, which is one Calculation
component of the whole gravity center of crane on the
ground
e The offset in direction of crawler, which is the other Calculation
component of the whole gravity center of crane on the
ground

search for the rigging type and size. The user is provided with an crane type of Demag CC8800, the boom/jib combination of main
option to select the rigging equipment from a list stored in the boom with superlift, a main boom length of 90 m, a radius of 18
rigging database or alternatively to enter the height and weight of m, a counterweight of 280 t, a center weight of 100 t, a super-
a suitable rigging of his/her choice. In addition, based on the size counter weight of 0 t, the lift capacity of 414 t, a supermast length
and weight of the lift under consideration, the developed system of 42 m, etc. Fig. 14 tells us that the highlighted configuration has
generates default values for the rigging weight and height. The the least rental cost option for its simple combination, a shortest
total lifting height, position height, working radius, total lifting
boom length, and no supercounter weight. This crane configura-
weight, ground pressure, and clearance between the boom/jib and
tion has the lifting height of 93.5 m, clearance between boom and
the equipment are entered as shown in Figs. 12 and 13. The total
lifting height and the total lifting weight have the default values the equipment of 0.58 m, and ground bearing pressure of 0.68
according to the rigging and equipment data and they can be MPa. The selected crane configuration has been successfully em-
modified by user. After pressing the “OK” button, all technically ployed in the real lifting and performed very well.
feasible crane configurations are listed on the output window as
shown in Fig. 14. However, it is quite probable that no configu-
ration comes out according to the user inputs if no crane configu-
ration satisfies all equations. If so, we may modify our inputs or
import other cranes data to the database.
In the actual case, 89 different technically feasible crane con-
figurations can be found. These configurations may be ordered by
lift capacity and length of main boom or working radius. The
highlighted configuration in Fig. 13 was selected, which has the

A: Staging
location

B: Targeted
location

Fig. 10. Planform view of the actual case Fig. 11. Elevation view of the actual case

JOURNAL OF COMPUTING IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2011 / 63

Downloaded 16 Nov 2011 to 202.118.67.103. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit http://www.ascelibrary.org
 Fig. 12. Basic requirements of the job entered interface

Fig. 13. Interface of limitations for crane selection

Different Results with Different Parameters
In an effort to demonstrate the accuracy and capabilities of the
developed algorithm, four hypothetical scenarios are provided,
where one of input parameters 共Fig. 12兲 is modified based on
actual case, as shown in Table 2. As an example of Scenario 1,
only allowable ground bearing pressure is modified as 0.6 MPa,
the others are same as the actual case. Obviously, there are dif-
ferent results from the one of actual case, as shown in Table 3.
Then, we can see that the proposed algorithm is efficient.
Obviously, the outputs of our algorithm vary with various in-
puts. The crane configurations in the output list must pass the
three steps 共verifying the lifting capacity of the crane, verifying
clearance of crane’s boom and jib, and verifying ground bearing
pressure described in the section “Flowchart and Details of Pro- Fig. 14. Technically feasible crane configurations
posed Algorithms”兲 according to the inputs, which can be seen as
evaluation criteria for the three tests. That is, the crane configu-
ration which does not pass any of the three tests would not appear select a crane according to constraints of lifting capacity, clear-
in the output. ance boom/jib to equipment, and ground bearing pressure. The
In addition, many options of boom/jib combinations are pro- lifting capacity check and clearance check perform calculation
vided for the user in Fig. 13. Moreover, in the actual case, the under a wide range of complicated boom/jib combinations. Fur-
crane configurations contain the two boom/jib combinations of thermore, because the boom/jib and the equipment are coplanar
“main boom with superlift” and “main boom+ fixed jib with su- when the equipment is lifted to the highest position, that is, when
perlift.” It validated the capability of the developed algorithms in the most possible intersection occurs, a two-dimensional geom-
handling complex boom/jib combinations. etry method instead of the sophisticated 3D geometry method is
applied in the calculation of clearance boom/jib to equipment to
improve the performance of crane selection. Our algorithm
Conclusions mainly focuses on selecting lattice boom crane and considers se-
lecting a crane to lift a certain piece of material once. The sce-
A newly developed algorithm for selecting lattice mobile cranes nario of selecting a crane to move several pieces of material to
on construction sites has been presented. The paper provides a different places, which involves path planning of crane, will be
systematic approach to the selection of mobile cranes on con- taken into our further research.
struction sites. It focuses primarily on the procedural algorithm to The algorithm is incorporated into a CAD system that inte-

Table 2. Actual Case and Hypothetical Scenarios of Different Lifting Requirements

Allowable clearance between Allowable ground
Total lift weight Total lift height Position height Working radius the boom/jib and equipment bearing pressure
Cases 共t兲 共m兲 共m兲 共m兲 共m兲 共MPa兲
Actual case 410 93 6.6 17.5 0.5 0.7
Scenario 1 410 93 6.6 17.5 0.5 0.6
Scenario 2 410 93 6.6 17.5 0.7 0.7
Scenario 3 410 93 7.5 17.5 0.5 0.7
Scenario 4 410 95 6.6 17.5 0.5 0.7

64 / JOURNAL OF COMPUTING IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2011

Downloaded 16 Nov 2011 to 202.118.67.103. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit http://www.ascelibrary.org
Table 3. Results of the Actual Case and Hypothetical Scenarios
Number of suitable
Cases crane configurations Best crane configuration
Actual case 89 Combination of main boom and superlift; main boom 90 m, radius 18 m, capacity 414 t, supermast 42 m,
counterweight 280 t, center weight 100 t, supercounter weight 0 t
Scenario 1 87 Supercounter weight 100 t with radius 22 m, the others same as actual case
Scenario 2 85 Radius 20 m, capacity 468 t, supercounter weight 100 t with radius 19 m, the others same as actual case
Scenario 3 85 Main boom 96 m, radius 20 m, capacity 466 t, supercounter weight 100 t with radius 19 m, the others same as
actual case
Scenario 4 80 Main boom 96 m, capacity 412, the others same as actual case

grates equipment and environment drawing, rigging selection and
calculation, crane selection, crane modeling, lifting simulation,
and lift plan generation. Some parameters of equipment and en-
vironment drawing and rigging selection and calculation module,
such as dimension of equipment, rigging attachments weigh, etc.,
are the inputs of crane selection algorithm, and the outputs of the
proposed algorithm are the inputs of crane modeling, lifting simu-
lation, and lift plan generation. Finally, a case is presented to
demonstrate the effectiveness, usability, and accuracy of the de-
veloped algorithm.
References
Abraham, W. 共1990兲. “Expert systems for crane selection.” Constr. Man-
age. Econom., 8, 179–190.
Al-Hussein, M. 共1999兲. “An integrated system for crane selection and
utilization.” Ph.D. thesis, Dept. of Building Civil and Environmental
Engineering, Concordia Univ., Montreal.
Al-Hussein, M., Alkass, S., and Moselhi, O. 共2001兲. “An algorithm for
mobile crane selection and location on construction sites.” Constr.
Innovation, 1共2兲, 92–105.
Al-Hussein, M., Alkass, S., and Moselhi, O. 共2005兲. “Optimization algo-
rithm for selection and on site location of mobile cranes.” J. Constr.
Eng. Manage., 131共5兲, 579–590.
Al-Hussein, M., Muhammad, A. N., Haitao, Y., and Kim, H.共2006兲. “In-
tegrating 3D visualization and simulation for tower crane operations
on construction sites.” Autom. Constr., 15, 554–562.
Dharwadkar, P. V., Varghese, K., O’Connor, J. T., and Gatton, T. M.
共1994兲. “Graphical visualization for planning heavy lifts.” Proc., 3rd
Congress on Computing in Civil Engineering, K. Khozeimeh, ed.,
ASCE, New York, 759–766.
Haas, C. T., and Lin, K. L. 共1995兲. “An interactive database system with
graphical linkage for computer aided heavy lift planning.” Automation
and Robotics in Construction, 12, 313–324.
Hammad, A., Wang, H., Zhang, C., and Al-Hussein, M.. 共2006兲. “Visu-
alizing crane selection and operation in virtual environment.” Proc.,
6th Int. Conf. on Construction Applications of Virtual Reality.
Hanna, A. S. 共1994兲. “Selectcrane: An expert system for optimum crane
selection.” Proc., 1st Int. Congress on Computing in Civil Engineer-
ing, 958–963.
Hanna, A. S., and Lotfallah, W. B. 共1999兲. “A fuzzy logic approach to the
selection of cranes.” Autom. Constr., 8共5兲, 597–608.
Hornaday, W. C., Haas, C. T., O’Connor, J. T., and Wen, J. 共1993兲.
“Computer-aided planning for heavy lifts.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage.,
119共3兲, 498–515.
Kang, S. C., and Miranda, E. 共2004兲. “Automated simulation of the erec-
tion activities in virtual construction.” Proc., 10th Int. Conf. on Com-
puting in Civil and Building Engineering, Weimar, Germany.
Lin, K. L., and Haas, C. T. 共1996兲. “Multiple heavy lifts optimization.” J.
Constr. Eng. Manage., 122共4兲, 354–362.
Mahalingam, A., Nair, H. S., and Varghese, K. 共2000兲. “A computer-
aided heavy lift planning model.” Proc., 8th Int. Conf. on Computing
in Civil and Building Engineering, ASCE, Reston, Va., 996–1003.
Moselhi, O., Alkass, S., and Al-Hussein, M. 共2004兲. “Innovative 3D-
modelling for selecting and locating mobile cranes.” Eng., Constr.,
Archit. Manage., 11共5兲, 373–380.
Reddy, S. D., Varghese, K., and Srinivasan, N. 共2007兲.“A computer-aided
system for planning and 3D-visualization of multiple heavy lifts op-
erations.” Proc., 24th Int. Symp. on Automation and Robotics in Con-
struction (ISARC 2007).
Sawhney, A., and Mund, A. 共2001兲. “IntelliCranes: An integrated crane
type and model selection system.” Constr. Manage. Econom., 19共2兲,
227–237.
Sawhney, A., and Mund, A. 共2002兲. “Adaptive probabilistic neural
network-based crane type selection system.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage.,
128共3兲, 265–273.
Tantisevi, K., and Akinci, B. 共2008兲. “Simulation-based identification of
possible locations for mobile cranes on construction sites.” J. Comput.
Civ. Eng., 22共1兲, 21–30.
Varghese, K., Dharwadkar, P., Wolfhope, J., and James, T. O. 共1997兲. “A
heavy lift planning system for crane lifts.” Microcomput. Civ. Eng.,
12, 31–42.
Zhang, P., Harris, F. C., Olomolaiye, P. O., and Holt, G. D. 共1999兲. “Lo-
cation optimization for a group of tower cranes.” J. Constr. Eng. Man-
age., 125共2兲, 115–122.

JOURNAL OF COMPUTING IN CIVIL ENGINEERING © ASCE / JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2011 / 65

View publication stats Downloaded 16 Nov 2011 to 202.118.67.103. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit http://www.ascelibrary.org