1 10 1 https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/21127/archive/files/673bb913c319b8c1a27e7c1d5e589e9a.pdf?Expires=1774483200&Signature=CksLeJ6%7El51rKxNCb7gZf0W-Hoyp-hQ7PUDp56thZcOicjwaGdzcFRKMFrJRfD13U-uNe3UU-d-rpVUY9RPwFcwnuUaI3DiAn7ompLG0sFJMDfmeIDjxzo4xHWJEjlaoLhpvrRzn1VM68nRUF6wAX%7Eee46OKbNL67CHzpwc0KaVWkyl2voBC0EpNWVgwZrwhVC53EXxHZ%7EcQkrv-YQ2e58TMqMSHARMYdBjp5dGbcWcrWFOM5Yi0LOOA3QehJVQUbtZ0ol4yf-2%7E83AY-UxcgJcdihYccyWk2qNxVXhJm4Y1MBnBbAGR93H-F2MTH9hdjlb9C4h1znawG%7EixeHA7ug__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM a6104d81a9b16844cc753010652f86d8 PDF Text Text Maintenance and operation of the 1885 rope-driven Craven Bros gantry crane Bill Jordan FIEAust CPEng, (Engineering Heritage Newcastle) Bill Jordan & Associates Pty Ltd, PO Box 141, Newcastle, NSW 2300 Australia; bill@bjaeng.com.au SUMMARY: Members of Engineering Heritage Newcastle, a group of the Institution of Engineers Australia, have been maintaining and demonstrating an 1885 Craven Bros gantry crane, which is thought to be the only one still operating anywhere in the world in its original configuration. This paper sets out details of the crane and the trials and tribulations which have attended its operation since members have been doing the work. It started out with members just “doing” but as time went on insurance and Workplace Health and Safety issues had to be resolved, not only to allow work to continue but to ensure that the crane continues to be conserved for future generations. Figure 1: The crane being driven by an EHA volunteer prior to the museum relocating to the workshops buildings. Most of the photographs in this paper date from before the Museum occupation of the building. General History Until 1889 Newcastle was the centre of the separate northern system of the NSW Railways, including its connection with Queensland at Wallangarra. There was no rail connection to Sydney until the first Hawkesbury River railway bridge was opened in that year. From its opening in 1857, independent maintenance facilities had been established for the Great Northern Railway at Honeysuckle Point, in Newcastle. Figure 2: Development of the New South Wales railway systems 1 �The Craven Crane, as it is usually called, is a 16 ton overhead travelling crane manufactured in Britain in 1885 by Craven Bros of Manchester. It was bought for installation in the Boiler Shop when the structure was nearing completion in 1885 and the building had to be heightened to cater for it. It was shipped from England and arrived in Newcastle in April 1886 with the manifest description “Craven Brothers 16-ton rope powered travelling crane [and one] crab winch for lifting locomotives”. From scant records it is believed that the workshop line shaft, from which the crane is powered, was driven by a steam engine, supplied by an external boiler, which was mounted on the workshop floor. As early as 1913 the drive was changed to a DC electric motor located where the steam engine had been; the existing (new) drive motor drives the original belt wheel. Figure 3: The earliest known photo of the main drive with the motor appearing to be at the end of the belt on the floor, probably taken after the workshop was used for other purposes post 1928. The modern drive arrangement, using the same belt wheel, is on the right. The former Boiler Shop is now a gallery of the Newcastle Museum. Crane girders were originally provided for both the workshop bays and the centre girders have planks laid between the bottom flanges to provide a convenient walkway from which access is gained to the crane. The top flanges support softwood timbers (North American Douglas Fir) to which the crane rails are fixed with dog spikes. All four crane beams carry the timber rail beds, indicating that it had been intended to install a second crane. The rails for the existing crane are stamped 1883, and there are no dog spike marks in the timbers of the northern crane bay, indicating that a second crane was never installed. 2 �The role of the Honeysuckle Development Corporation The Honeysuckle Development Corporation (HDC) was established by the NSW Government in 1992 to manage the urban redevelopment of surplus government land in Newcastle. Much of this land was the Railways property centred on the former Honeysuckle Goods Yards, to which were added areas surplus to Newcastle Ports Corporation use and other areas stretching from the harbour frontage westward along Throsby Creek. The former Honeysuckle Point Railway Workshops, which had been renamed the Civic Workshops in the recent past, and consisting of the former Division Engineer’s Office, the remaining brick workshops buildings and various small framed buildings not considered of high significance, had been identified as of heritage significance and placed on the State Heritage Register at the time of the HDC’s incorporation. The heritage study for the whole area (Doring, 1990), commissioned by the State Rail Authority prior to handover, had identified the Craven Bros crane as being in remarkably intact original condition (only one drive belt was missing and there was some minor damage) and “of VERY HIGH (perhaps National) cultural significance”. It is now considered to be of International significance. The crane was recommended for conservation and a Conservation Plan (Doring, 1995) was subsequently commissioned. Work to conserve the crane was carried out by the Hunter Valley Training Company, an apprentice training organisation, under the supervision of the (then) NSW Department of Public Works. The work consisted of cleaning, lubricating and painting, replacement of some bearing bushes and pulleys, new drive and control ropes, supply of new oil bottles and the installation of a new electric drive motor for the workshop line shaft. The work was completed in 1996 and the workshops buildings and crane were awarded a Historical Engineering Marker in December 1996 to coincide with the First International Engineering Heritage Conference held in Newcastle. As far as is known, the crane was not operated by anyone following the work. The drive and control ropes had never been tensioned, not were there oil residues in the new oil bottles. The involvement of the Institution of Engineers Australia The Institution of Engineers Australia, generally referred to as Engineers Australia, is the peak body for professional engineers in Australia and encompasses all branches of engineering. Its main administration is in the national capital in Canberra and it has divisions based mainly in State capitals, but with two in New South Wales based in Sydney and Newcastle, reflecting the distribution of the engineering profession at the time of the Institution’s founding in 1919. As well as colleges for the main disciplines (civil, mechanical etc.) it has a number of special interest groups of which Engineering Heritage Australia is one. Whilst the Conservation Report had recommended that the crane be regularly maintained and operated following its conservation, no mechanisms had been put into place to effect this. The crane sat idle gathering dirt and with bearings and leather belts drying out. The author and another member of the Newcastle Division Engineering Heritage Branch (EHA Newcastle) approached the Honeysuckle Development Corporation in late 2001 and offered to investigate returning the crane to operation. So began a period of trial and error coupled with cajoling the HDC to have work carried out. Even the power to the line shaft motor had to be reconnected as the circuits had been diverted to other uses. In time other Engineers Australia Heritage Branch members joined the “crew”. Maintenance, consisting of cleaning, lubrication and belt dressing, was initially carried out at a maximum three monthly interval. Particular care had to be taken to check all parts of the crane and rails for nylon line and other remains of decorations hung from the crane by unknowing other users, 3 �although now the Museum staff are more aware than were occasional users previously. Once some stranded steel wire was found to be jamming gears and it was feared that nylon line, used to hang decorations during venue hire, could damage bearing bushes. With little guidance, it took three years of research and experience before the crane could be reliably operated. No information was initially available as to the correct grades of oil to be used, nor how to treat leather drive belts. It was two years of trial and error before the crane was enabled to run smoothly. The crane was demonstrated a number of times a year to coincide with events such as the National Trust Heritage Festival and Engineering Week, and at other times as requested by community groups. Building work to convert the workshops for the relocated Newcastle Museum commenced in 2010 and members of the “crew” had to be continually vigilant. At one stage the architect wanted to remove the line shaft to place an air conditioning duct: this was strongly contested and in the end the duct was placed elsewhere, but the “new” access ladder to the platform was lost. The crane was shrouded in an attempt to exclude dust and occasional lubrication was undertaken using elevating platforms. With access by scissor lift, the crane was operated for a live radio interview three days before the museum opening, with the announcer sitting on the crane platform with the author operating. After that the builder’s elevating platforms were removed and no alternative access was available. In its Museum setting, the crane is only just being brought back into running order after three years of negotiations. Funding from a tight Museum budget was found to build a new ladder/stairway to the crane platform and negotiations are still in progress under very restrictive “safety” requirements. The crane Design The engineering and physics associated with the crane provide us with some insight into mechanical and structural design engineering of the late 1800s. At that time the use of flat leather belts and line shafts was quite common in many mechanical drives of drills, lathes, shapers, planers and many other stationary machines, as was the use of idler / drive pulleys, cross-over belts for reversing, etc. However these were usually associated with stationary pieces of equipment or, where the machine was portable, the motive power for the leather belt drive was an integral part of the machine, i.e. on a threshing or bailing machine. Power mechanism In the case of the Craven crane the motive power was stationary on the floor of the workshop (we believe as noted above — there is also speculation that a wall mounted or externally located engine was used as in the former Sydney railway workshops at Eveleigh) and the crane travelled up and down the full length of the workshop — some 120 feet (39.4.m) — and the motive power had to be transmitted to the crane at all times during its operations. This is achieved by a continuously running rope which is driven, today, by an electric motor, through a Figure 4: Main drive rope 4 �reduction gearbox, flat leather belt to the line shaft which then drives the flat belt driven pulley via bevel gears. The final drive to the rope is via another flat leather belt and a change-over mechanism using an idler / drive pulley arrangement which is controlled from the crane driver’s cabin by Figure 5: Main drive to crane from line shaft consists of bevel gears (hidden under temporary tarpaulin) and drive belt operated by eccentric on control rope Figure 6: The drive to the hoist is from the centre wheel through the pair of belts in the foreground. pulling a smaller rope which moves the flat belt from the idler pulley to the drive pulley. This then drives the troughed rope pulley which drives the larger endless rope which provides the motive power to the overhead travelling crane. There is evidence from an old piece of drive rope found on site that the original was made from cotton; the replacement installed as part of the conservation is manila. The replacement rope, unfortunately, was sized to run in the bottom of the groove of the drive wheels, whereas there is evidence that the original was larger and gripped the sides of the grooves, which gave it greater power transfer ability. If cotton rope of the right size can be found, a replacement would be desirable in a future project. Power requirements Figure 7: Drive rope tensioning mechanism The fact that this overhead travelling crane derives all of its motive power from an endless rope that runs in a continuous circuit as shown in Figure 4, gives one an indication of the innovation of the crane manufacturer at the time (1885) as well as their mechanical and structural engineering design and manufacturing capabilities. The original; rope is now known to have been 13⁄8 inches (35 mm) in diameter. From a table of power transmission of cotton rope drives (Mechanical World Year Book, 1941), this size rope will transmit between 12.5 H.P. (9.3 kW) at 1500 ft/minute (7.6 m/s) and 33.3 H.P. (24.8 kW) at 6000 ft/minute 30.5 m/s) 5 �If we translate this to the 16 ton hook using the various gear ratios involved in the rope pulley, the leather flat belt drive, the worm drive for the cross shaft to the crane crab and the pinion gear to the 16 ton hook drum and the drum diameter this translates to a hoisting speed of a 16 ton (tonne) load of approximately 5 feet per minute (1.5 m/min). The horsepower required to lift 16 ton at 5 feet per minute is 5.4 H.P. (4 kW) Allowing an overall drive mechanism efficiency of say 60%, this requires an input of 9 H.P. (6.7 kW) at the rope pulley. Referring to Figure 6 it can be seen that the rope pulley which drives the hoisting motion is the centre one on which the rope is in contact with the diameter rope pulley for 160 degrees. The published figures (Mechanical World Year Book, 1941) show that, for example, 30.8 H.P. was available if the rope ran at 5000 ft/min. A similar exercise done for the cross travel motion (which is driven by the R.H. rope pulley where the rope is in contact for 90o) and the long travel motion (which is driven by the L.H. rope pulley where the rope is also in contact for 90°) allows us to calculate the power requirements for the other motions. When it is considered that all of these motions could have been engaged at the same time and estimating the weight of the crab is 2 ton and the total weight of the crane including the 16 ton load is 24 ton, we can estimate that the total power transmitted by the endless rope was approximately 30 H.P. (22.4 kW). This suggests the rope was run at 5000 ft/min, a figure often seen in descriptions of 19th century mill technology. Again reference to the published figures, and using the 35 mm diameter and 180° of the primary rope drive pulley, shows a reasonable correlation between calculated and published figures for coefficient of friction, rope cross section tension and the tension required from the counter weight (Figure 7) to allow the drive force to be transmitted from the rope pulley to the endless rope. Having satisfied ourselves as to the reasonable correlation between calculated and published values we now move on to present day usage of the crane and the demonstration of the crane to interested parties. The main consideration for the operation of the crane is Workplace Health and Safety (WHS). Obviously WHS obligations today are substantially different from those of the 1880s and the following is our progress to date in ultimately having an operational crane which complies with present day WHS requirements while still retaining as much “originality” as possible. At this stage it should be remembered that EHA Newcastle Division are only the caretakers of the crane and the ultimate responsibility of the safe operation of the crane rests with the owners of the property, now the Newcastle Museum, a unit of Newcastle City Council. WHS issues Changes in Workplace Health and Safety As is the case in most other countries, Workplace Health and Safety (WHS) as it is now known following recent legislative changes (previously OH&S), has been changing continually and becoming more and more restrictive. As can be seen in the older image in figure 3, a simple rung ladder was used originally to take operators up to the walkway. The bottom section of this ladder had been cut off to restrict access at some time in the 20th century. Access and maintenance issues During the conservation of the crane in 1995/96 a number of modifications were installed. In addition to the new line shaft drive motor, the maintenance platform along the eastern end of the crane bay was fitted with a handrail; a new access ladder, with a lockable folding mechanism for security, was installed; the platform beside the drivers cabin was extended and fitted with a handrail and mid-height wires were fitted to the handrail on the crane bridge. 6 �In 2006, recent changes to (then) OH&S requirements, together with the insurance issues outlined below, prompted EHA Newcastle to have a professional review of the crane operations and maintenance procedures. Surprisingly the review showed that some of the work carried out in the 1990s does not meet current requirements and that some additional measures were required. In particular the 1990s access ladder had to be substantially altered and a safety wire had to be installed for use with safety harnesses during some crane maintenance operations. To further enhance safety a balustrade was installed beside the walkway formed by the crane rail girders on the side opposite the crane and minor adjustments were made to allow safer access to the maintenance platform on the eastern end of the crane bay. Again, following further review by Newcastle Council’s WHS staff, additional measures had to be implemented. This included a requirement for all volunteers to attend a Working at Heights training course and be issued with the required permit. Line shaft oil bottles were filled for over 10 years, and without incident, by removing planks on the walkway and reaching through to the bottles. This is no longer allowed and much time is taken in gaining access to each bottle by elevating platform. Originally crew members were happy to climb over the crane to lubricate it as required. Now our volunteers have to wear harnesses (and get tangled in the lanyards), for any operation. Safe Working Method Statement proformas have to be completed for any work. Operation When EHA members first started operating the crane, enquiry was made of Workcover NSW, the government body responsible for all workplace regulation, including safety of cranes and other plant, to ensure that our operation was legal. After all, as the only such crane still operating anywhere, it would be rather difficult to find an experienced trainer for a new operator. At that time we received verbal advice that we could continue to operate the crane for demonstration purposes providing it was not used to lift loads. Since the Museum opening there has not been one public demonstration of the crane in operation and is still proving difficult to even have a descriptive sign erected to indicate that it is hiding up in the gloom of the new exhibition space. The building is mainly used for temporary exhibitions and a children’s science experience and playground. The crane can no longer run for the full length of the workshop, thanks to an “earth ball” suspended from the roof in its path. At the time of writing in 2015, some maintenance days had been held and all the motions of the crane were able to be operated successfully. It is intended that the crane be fully operational, and demonstrated, during the scheduled Engineering Heritage Australia conference to be held in the Museum in December 2015. Demonstrations for the general public will need much more negotiation. Insurance issues At the outset it was assumed that work carried out by volunteers was covered by Engineers Australia’s insurance policies and enquiries backed up this assumption. However in 2004 there was a complete review of the policies following a payout on a sporting injury incurred during a Young Engineers’ event; the work being done by our members came under scrutiny by the Institution’s insurers. In addition, the HDC looked more closely at its own responsibilities and liabilities in line with a general review brought about by the “crisis” in the insurance industry. The concerns raised covered personal injury for the volunteers, public liability and general insurance of the building and the crane. For a time the bureaucratic approach first adopted threatened to stop EHA’s work with the crane and to leave it idle and deteriorating into the future. 7 �The first draft agreement from HDC required Engineers Australia to have a licence agreement with respect to the crane and the building and take full responsibility for all insurances, including fabric and public liability. This was clearly unacceptable and was retracted when it was put to them that the HDC had a responsibility under the NSW Heritage Act towards maintenance of the crane: they conceded that an alternative mechanism was not available. It was emphasised that items of mechanical plant have to be turned over to keep bearings from drying out and, in the case of the crane, leather belts have to be dressed continually as well. The eventual agreement, an “indemnity agreement for a volunteer”, centred on a certification that all volunteers operating the crane would be covered by the Engineers Australia insurances for personal injury and that HDC would accept responsibility as owners for the other insurance. The next hurdle to overcome was that of insurance for volunteers by the Engineers Australia insurers. The main obstacle appeared to be a complete lack of understanding on the part of the insurance broker and the insurers as to what was involved. This became very frustrating as, similarly to so many such cases, the languages being used by the different parties seemed to have very little in common. In the end and following preparation of complete operating statements in terms acceptable to the insurance industry, specific inclusion of the volunteer work on the crane was accepted by the insurers. The only requirement was that all volunteers be current financial members of Engineers Australia. This requirement had a drawback in that one retired engineer, a former Fellow of the Institution who had let his subscription lapse, had to cease further involvement; on the other hand it set a precedent for the Institution when one keen member of EHA (Newcastle), a former senior railways engineer who had never joined, was accepted for entry as a retired member. The insurance issues raised by the crane operation highlighted a number of other insurance issues which had never been contemplated by the Institution or its insurers. Engineering Heritage walks have been organized for some years by EHA members in a number of cities, including Newcastle. The risk to the Institution from incidents happening on these walks, and whether existing public liability insurance policies gave adequate coverage, was properly investigated for the first time. Once Newcastle City Council and its Museum took responsibility for the crane a new set of insurance circumstances prevailed. Like so many such institutions, the Museum relies on a group of volunteers who give their time as guides, and their skills in maintaining exhibits; insurances for these people are managed by Council. The EHA volunteers were able to fit neatly into this arrangement. Conclusions Keeping historical machinery in operation is the best means of conserving it and provides an unequalled opportunity for the current generation to appreciate it. The work required can be rewarding, but takes perseverance to overcome the difficulties presented by bureaucrats in the current environment. Acknowledgments This paper is based on one presented by the author in collaboration with Mr Peter Cockbain, AM FIEAust CPEng, at the 2005 Engineering Heritage Conference in Sydney. The support of the Honeysuckle Development Corporation, followed by the Newcastle Museum, in allowing members of Engineering Heritage Australia (Newcastle) to work with the crane, and their willingness to continue to fund major work is gratefully acknowledged. 8 �References 1. Honeysuckle Point Heritage Study, 1990, C & MJ Doring Pty Ltd for State Rail Authority of NSW, Sydney 2. Craven Bros Rope Drive Crane at the former Honeysuckle Point Railway Workshops, Newcastle NSW, Conservation Report and Scope of Works, 1995, C & MJ Doring Pty Ltd for NSW Department of Public Works and Services. 2. Rope Driving, Mechanical World Year Book, 194, Emmett & Co. Ltd, Manchester. 9 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Big Stuff 2015 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Alison Wain Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 03.09.2015 - 04.09.2015 Paper A paper presented at a conference or a workshop Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource <em>Maintenance and operation of the 1885, rope-driven Craven Bros gantry crane</em> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Bill Jordan crane display industrial heritage operating rope driven