The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1 LEGOLAND DR; ; CB043904; PermitJob Address: Permit Type: Parcel No: Valuation: Occupancy Group: Project Title: NOTICE: Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the "Imposition" of fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to as "feeslexactions." You have 90 days from the date this permit was issued to protest imposition of these feeslexactions. If you protest them, you must follow the protest procedures set forth in Government Code Section 66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure to timely follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul their imposition. You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified feeslexaciions DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity changes, nor planning, zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection with this project. NOR DOES IT APPLY to any ~ Applicant: JIM FEND 1 LEGOLAND DR 92008 760-918-5461 City of Carlsbad fliq 1635 Faraday Av Carlsbad, CA 92008 Commercialllndustrial Permit Permit No: CB043904 Building Inspection Request Line (760) 602-2725 1 LEGOLAND DR CBAD COMMIND Sub Type: COMM 2111000900 Lot #: 0 Status: ISSUED $0.00 Construction Type: NEW Applied: 10/18/2004 LEGOLAND -PERMANENT FOUNDATION Plan Approved: 11/12/2004 FOR ROCK CLIMBING WALL Issued: 11/12/2004 Reference #: Entered By: KMT Inspect Area: Plan Check#: Owner: LEGOLAND CALIFORNIA INC <LF> LEGOLAND ESTATES AG 1 LEGOLAND DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 Building Permit Add'l Building Permit Fee Plan Check Add'l Plan Check Fee Plan Check Discount Strong Motion Fee Park Fee LFM Fee Bridge Fee BTD #2 Fee BTD #3 Fee Renewal Fee Add'l Renewal Fee Other Building Fee Pot. Water Con. Fee Meter Size Add'l Pot. Water Con. Fee Recl. Water Con. Fee $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $120.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Meter Size Add'l Recl. Water Con. Fee Meter Fee SDCWA Fee CFD Payoff Fee PFF PFF (CFD Fund) License Tax License Tax (CFD Fund) Traffic Impact Fee Traffic Impact (CFD Fund) PLUMBING TOTAL ELECTRICAL TOTAL MECHANICAL TOTAL Master Drainage Fee Sewer Fee Redev Parking Fee Additional Fees TOTAL PERMIT FEES $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $120.00 Total Fees: $1 20.00 Total Payments To Date: $50.00 Balance Due: $70.00 5314 ll/Q/'Q4 0002 01 02 BUJLDING PLANS - ATTACHED INSTORAGE CGF 70.00 FINAL APPROVAL Date: -?/ ~ 8-- Clearance: - Inspector: + rn /' n PERMIT APPLICATION CITY OF CARLSBAD BUILDING DEPARTMENT 2075 Las Palmas Dr., Carlsbad CA 92009 (760) 438-1 161 FOR OFFICE USE ONLY PLAN CHECK NO.@~~L~~~YOY EST. VAL. 8 of Bathrooms 6. CONTRACTOR - COWAWY (Su. 7031.6 Bwinoss and Rofr ounty which roquiroo permit to cmwtrwt. dtn, improw, dwndfrh or rapair my strwtwo, pnor to its irruanco, also roquiros tho applicant for such P.rmit to fh 8 r(grwd rtotanmt thrt ho b UCMd punuMt to thm provluonr of tho Contractor's Ucmu Law IChoptar 9. commMdtng with Soction 7000 of DMmh 3 of tho &drwrr and Profosmiocu C0d.l or thmt ho b oumgt thuafrom. and tho basts for th. oIkg.d exemption. Any violation of Saction 7031.6 by My oppkant for 8 pwmh subi.ctS th Opp#Cant to dvil paIOitv of not mor0 thmn ftvo hundrmd dollars 1$6001l. Namo Ad&- Ckv Sut.Izi9 Td.phon. # Stat. Lic.nr0 # ~k.nu a- C~eudMuucyY.8 DrigMr Noma Ad&- city StatdZip Tmlophona 6. ..- *. . ~ ... - - . .. workus' Compomorion Mrotioo: I twmby ottirm undn p.~ky or pww o(u ot tho 0 of tho work for which tha permit b kud. 0 irruod. My workor's componsothn inswanco unkr and policy numbor Ma: Inswarno Compony pdky No. Expiration Dato [THIS SECTION NEED NOT BE COMPLETED IF THE PERMIT IS FOR ONE HUNDRED WLURS 1~1001 OR LESS) 0 to bocomo subloct to tho Workors' Comportoation hws of Califomla. WARNINO: Fdum to ~HUO wo#kus' SIGNATURE DATE 7. ~*~DE~TK)W', -... -. -- .?-/ . I I heroby affwm that i am oxompt from tho Contractor's Umrm Law for tho following room: tJ I, as ownor of tho pr0g.n~ or my ampbvooa wkh wagn os ttuir soto componution, do tho work and tho strwtwo ia not tntondmd or offord for sa10 6.c. 7044, Bwinori and Rofrsiono Code: Tho Contractor's Lkonso Uw door rot apply to an ownu of prop.~y who builds or Improvos thoroon, and who door ruch work h1mael1 or through.hls own ompbynm, proviad thot such ImprOvOmMP uo not lntmd.d or 0ffn.d for Bok. If, howaw, tho bulding or improvomont is sd withtn one yoor of complotion, tho owmr-buildu will hmvo tho budon of proving tho1 ho did not Wd or Lnpova for tho purpomo of ulo). I, as ownor of tho propwty, am nrdra)v.ly contr8cting with fiC8ns.d eontrwton to ConStrUcl tho pco).ct 1su. 7044. kab and Rohuionr Cod.: Tho ontractor'a Lieorw Law doom not apply to on ownor of proportv who builds or lmprovr thuoon, mnd eontracts far such pojocta with contractor1a) licoruod Stat* doctare I hovo and WHI maintain a cortilmto of consont to sdf-inru. for workus' Compurution as providod by Sution 3700 of tho Lobor Code, for tho portormanco I hovo lind will maintain em' cwnpwwtlon. u f.guind bv Saction 3700 Of tho L.bor Cod.. for tho ~0tla-0 of tho wort tor which tkis pumit is CERTIFICATE OF EXEMPTION: I cutHy thot In tho porformMco of tho wwk for which this pnmit b issuod. I ahom not omploy my poraon in my mannor so as tMI.0. b unl.wfd. urd .hJI .ubs.ct m mplorw to aMnl #ruklw md dvY fhs up to OM hundrod tmmd MU# ~100.oooi. h .ddkkn to th. et or cocllpn~tw 6nuo.. u prwld.d for ~n - 3700 of ttt~ ~.ba ~sd.. m-at md .-wa I-. pwsuont to tho Contractor's Uconoo Low). 0 1. 2. 3 kukwu .nd Profoomlons Cod. for thh rommon: # I am orampt ~rd.r ~oction I pw-lly plan to provida tho major I.ba I lhavo I havo not) rignod an applkmtion for 0 kJlding pormh for tho propoord work. I havo contractd with tho following pmon Ifh) to provia tho popord c-h llnckdr nmma I addrou I phonr numbu I contractors Lcnro numkr): mmtwi.lr fa cowtructh of th. proposed pf0P.n~ knpmv.mWn. 0 YES ON0 ~- 4. I phn to provldo portions of tho work. but I how hirmd tho fdlowhg perron to CoOIdinatm, urp.rvb. mnd provide th. majot wak bcluda nmmr / addrru / phon~ PROPERTY OWNER SIGNA COMPLETr TIUS 8E-N Is tho applicant or future buil program undw Soctiona 26506, REQUIREMENTS Of THE OFFICE OF EMERUENCY SERVICES AND THE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT. I horrby iffirm that thore ia a constructh I LENDER'S NAME LENDER'S ADDRESS of tho work for whlch this pumit IS hswd 1s.C. 3097W Civil Code). .. I. .I rbovo Information In corrwt ad thrt thm Lnfonnatkm on thm planr in accwsta. i rgrrr to cornpry with a11 City ordinancar and Stat* laws rolrting to bulw ConrtNCtiOn. I hU&Y WthOfh Wf@8UtivO# Of th. ck) Of c4dSb.d 10 H\tW upon tho bbovo mntmed propony for Inspectlon p~posoi. KEEP HARMLESS THE CITY OF CARLSOAD AGAINST ALL UAIItLITfES. I ALSO AORK TO rAV& INDLMNtW JUDQMENTS, COSTS AND EXP~NSES wHicn MAY IN WY WAY nccw r4-T SMO CITY IN coNmutirtcu OF THL ORANTINO OF TMIS PERMIT. OBHA: An OSHA pormlt Ir rrquitod (of rxcrvrtlonr ovor EXPIRATION: Evory pormlt hued by tho work autnhorkod by such parmit lo not 01 an do nod at any timr d drmolltlon or eocutructlm of struct~o~ mor 3 atorks In hright. vlalonr of thh Cod. ah.# oxplr. bv Imltatlon and becoma nut1 and vdd if the bJlding OT p.mJt or If tho bt~IIdhg 01 work ruthofimd by such pormtt is awped.d h. dN* of doyo 1Smctlon 106.4.4 Unlform Bulldiq Cod.). APPLICANT'S BIONATUR DATE City of Carlsbad Bldg Inspection Request For. -005 Permit# CB043904 Inspector Assignment: TP Title: LEGOLAND -PERMANENT FOUNDATION Description: FOR ROCK CLIMBING WALL Type: COMMIND Sub Type: COMM Phone: Inspector:-- P Job Address: 1 LEGOLANDDR Suite: Lot 0 Location: OWNER LEGOLAND CALIFORNIA INC <LF> LEGOLAND ESTATES AG Owner: LEGOLAND CALIFORNIA INC <LF> LEGOLAND ESTATES AG Remarks: CAN YOU FINAL? OR SHALL I SEND LETTER? Total Time: Requested By: CHRISTINE Entered By: CHRISTINE CD Description Act Comment 19 Final Structural Associated PCRs/CVs Inspection History PCROO224 APPROVED ELECTRICAL PLAN FOR COASTER; Date Description Act lnsp Comments 12/17/2004 11 FtglFoundationlPiers AP TP SLAB FOR CLIMB WALL 12/17/2004 12 SteellBond Beam AP TP PLANNING/ENGINEERING APPROVALS PERMIT NUMBER CB 04.3904 DATE 10- 20 -09 RESIDENTIAL TENANT IMPROVEMENT RESIDENTIAL ADDITION MINOR PLAZA CAMlNO REAL ( < $1 0,000.00) . CARLSBAD COMPANY STORES VILLAGE FAIRE COMPLETE OFFKE BUILDING PLANNER ENGINEER DATE EsGil Corporation - In Tartmrship with Govcrnmcnt for Building Safcty DATE: October 25, 2004 0 APPLICANT JURIS DICTION: Carlsbad 0 PLAN REVIEWER PLAN CHECK NO.: 04-3904 SET: I p-ap FILE PROJECT ADDRESS: 1 Leg0 Dr. PROJECT NAME: Foundation for Climbing Wall 0 w 0 0 0 0 w 0 w The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction’s building codes. The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction’s building codes when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff. The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck. The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at Esgil Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. The applicant’s copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant contact person. The applicant’s copy of the check list has been sent to: Esgil Corporation staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. Esgil Corporation staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. Person contacted: Telephone #: Date contacted: (by: ) Fax #: REMARKS: 1. Each sheet of the plans must be signed by the designer. 2. The engineer’s seal on the calculations and foundation detail shows that the license expired 9/30/04. It should be re-stamped with a new expiration date. Mail Telephone Fax In Person By: Kurt Culver Enclosures: Esgil Corporation 0 GA 0 MB EJ 0 PC 10/19/04 trnsrntl.dot 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 4 San Diego, California 92123 (858) 560-1468 Fax (858) 560-1576 Carlsbad 04-3904 * Oc$ober 25, 2004 .* Plan Check Fee by Ordinance PALUATION AND PLAN CHECK FEE 7 J U Rl SD I CTI ON : Carlsbad PLAN CHECK NO.: 04-3904 PREPARED BY: Kurt Culver DATE: October 25, 2004 BUILDING ADDRESS: 1 Leg0 Dr. 3UILDI NG OCCUPANCY: TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: Bldg. Permit Fee by Ordinance 1 V I Type of Review: 0 Complete Review 0 Repetitive Fee j] Repeats I $1 20.001 0 Structural Only 0 Other Hourly Hour* Esgil Plan Review Fee Based on hourly rate Comments: Sheet 1 of 1 macvalue.doc Page 1 of 2 Chris Romero From: Sent: To: Chris Romero Subject: RE: Jake Rippstein ljripp Q spectrumsports.com] Thursday, October 28,2004 10:19 AM Chris, I think that plans should come back here first so that I/we can make sure that all the pages that need to be signed, or restamped are identified clearly for the engineer. I will also have him stamp and sign each page in the calcs. Let me know Jake Spectrum Sports Inc. 720 West 200 South Logan, Utah 84321 Phone (888) 563-01 63 Fax (435) 792-3884 WWW.SPECTRUMSP0RTS. COM -----Original Message----- From: Chris Romero [mailto:chris.romero@america.lego.com] Sent: Thursday, October 28,2004 11:Ol AM To: 'jripp@spedrumsports.com' Subject : Hi Jake I heard back from the City of Carlsbad regarding the plans for the climbing wall. They are ready to issue the permit after the following conditions have been met. 1. pages should have the designers name typed on the bottom with the date and a signature. The plans must be signed by the designer. Each page in the calcs must have the designers signature. The 2. restamped with a current stamp. The stamp that was used to stamp the drawings has an expired date on it. They want the drawings I will pick up the plans and have them sent to you for restamping. This will probably be best because they already have been through the city and will have their comments or notes on them. Do you want me to send them directly to you or to the engineer? There are two sets. Let me know and I will send them today. Thanks 10/28/2004 I .. i- f- . .. r SPECIALIZED ANALYSIS ENGINEERING INC. The Siru&ralAna&sis, System Dynamics and Tesijhg Experts PO Box 6571 1770 N. Research Pkw, St. 160 North Logan, Utah 84341-6571 Tei: 1435) 755-8140 STRUCTURAL hALYSIS OF THE 32 FT. STATIONARY CLIMBING STRUCTURES mPARED FOR: REBOUND ACTION SPORTS HYDE PARK, UTAJ3 843 18 45 WEST 3800 NORTH, STE. B mPAFtED BY: SPECLALIZED ANALYSIS ENGINEE~G, I[NC 1’790 NORTH mSEARCH PARKWAY, STE 160 N. LOGAN, UTAH 84341 MARCH 9,2001 SPECIALIZED ANALYSIS ENGINEERING INC. THE STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS, SYSTEMS DYNAMICS AND TESTING EXPERTS March 12,2001 r I- - c I r r r To Whom it may Concern: The Structural Analysis Report titled “Structural Analysis of the 32 Ft Stationary Climbing Structures” dated March 9,2001 has been reviewed and approved for use with the following criteria emphasized: 1. 2. 3. 4. Each site must have a site-specific soil analysis performed to veri% that the soil is capable of 2000 lb/ft2 pressure minimum. All operational procedures specified in the Operators / Maintenance manuals be adhered to at all times including: Only Auto-Belay systems supplied by Rebound Action Sports / Action Amusements are acceptable systems. The Auto-Belay system must be used in accordance with the specified procedures supplied in this report, the owners and maintenance manuals and manufacturer specific instructions when supplied. a. No climbers on the wall structure when winds exceed 35 mph This professional stamp applies only to the three structures purchased by: Palace Entertainment 183 00 Von Karman Ave. Suite 900 Imine, CA 92612 Any questions regarding this analysis should be directed to Clay Carter, President, Specialized Analysis Engineering Inc. Sincerely, SAE Inc Reviewing Engineer: ?- LynnD. Wall CA Certificate: C4984 1 Expires: 9/30/04 r ncc I 1770 NORTH RESEARCH PARKWAY, Suite 160 NORTH LOGAN, UT 84341 USA TEL: (435) 755-8140 saeasae-inc.net FAX: (435) 753-2420 SPECIALIZED &ALYSIS ENGINEERING, INC. 1770 NORTH RESEARCH PARKWAY, STE 160 N. LOGAN, UTAH 84341 MARCH 9,2001 STRUCTURAL kiNALYSIS OF THE 32 FT. STATIONARY cLIM€3ING STRUCTURES REBOUND ACTION SPORTS 45 WEST 3800 NORTH, STE. B HYDE PARK, UTAH 843 18 PREPAREDBY: INTRODUCTION "he structural integrity of the 32 A DAR (4 person) / CND (3 person) stationary climbing structure has been evaluated by SAE engineers. Wind, seismic and operational loads as specified by the Uniform Building Code (1997) for California were assumed. Specific loading is detailed in this report. The climbing surface geometry or surface area associated with a 4 person wall PAR) was used. Anchor bolting and concrete pad specifications are presented for installation criteria for both an 80 mph and 1 10 mph wind loading scenario. A common steel super-structure is used in the &mework for both wind loads. The superstructure is continuously bonded to the woven- roving E-Glass / epoxy wall surface panels and the panels are required to carry some structural load. For the 80 mph wind load the top and bottom of the composite wall is also tied into the steel structure in addition to the standard bonding along the edges. To withstand the additional load of the 1 10 mph wind, the composite wall must be tied into the steel be every 8 A. A detailed review of the design, analysis procedure and results are presented in the document. Appendix A contains drawings, Appendix B contains fide element contour plots, Appendix C contains load calculations. c Finite element analysis was performed using MSC Nastran for Wmdows version 4.6. -1- STRUCTURE OVERVIEW Figure 1 below shows the structure of the 24 foot stationary climbing wall. Composite Wall Framework and composite panel are integrated to form a single structure. The framework is continuously bonded along the edges, and at every 8 feet along the height of the fiame (bottom, 8', 16', 24',32') at the center of the panel and innermost truss member. The steel structure is bolted to the concrete uniformly around the ' Composite to steel fiame bondline (32 feet long x 4 inches wide x 2 sides). %" diameter bolts are also placed every 3 feet. Figure 1. Wall structure overview. -2- Framework constructed of welded A500 Grade B tube steel. c Material Use in the Structure U, used in the u, used in the Classification analysis, ksi analysis, ksi A36 Gussets and tabs 36.0 62.0 *A500 Grade B All box and channels sections 46.0 67.0 MATERIALS 1 The primary frame structure is made with A500 Grade B box section steel. Gussets are made of A36 plate. Material certifications are required to be held at the manufacturer. The ASTM handbook lists A36 steel to have an ultimate strength of 62-102 ksi depending on the condition and a minimum yield strength of 36 ksi. A500 Grade B steel has a minimum ultimate strength of 62 ksi and a yield strength of 46 ksi. Specific values for both A36 and MOO Grade B include a Young's modulus of 3 1.9 Msi and a poisson's ratio of 0.32. Material E-Glass Panel Vectrotex 24 oz woven raving (50150 warp to weft layup) Cook DCPD blend 220 1 resin E,, = E, (Msi) GI2 WSi) Poisson's Ratio u12 2.0 0.251 0.32 Composite The wall is made of multiple layers of 24 ounce E-glass / epoxy woven roving with a balanced distribution of fibers in the weft and warp directions. This results in transversely isotropic stitlhess and strength properties for the ply. Each layer of woven roving is sandwiched between two 2 ounce chopped fiber mats for bonding purposes only. The woven roving is assumed to cany all structural loads. The thickness varies throughout the panel but has a minimum thickness around 0.25 inches. Conservative properties were selected for the model. To calculate the stif€ness and strength properties for the entire laminate, manufacturer's data sheets were obtained and used in conjunction with the theory of composites as detailed by Hyer [98]. The properties used in this analysis are onehalf of the theoretical predicted propedes in an effort to be conservative and account for the inherent variations on the manufacturing process. Table 2 lists the composite material properties used in this analysis. Because of the balanced symmetrical layup, the laminate is transversely isotropic. -3- MODEL ASSUMPTIONS In this analysis it is assumed there are no preexisting flaws (ie. cracks, Unintentional cuts or serious abrasions) in the structure. All welds are assumed to have been v&fied as meeting all applicable weld inspections procedures and standards as specified by AWS AI. 1. The actual composite wall profile varies both vertically and about the circumference. A representative profile was selected and maintained vertically through the a32 ft height. FEA MODEL Structural tube and channel steel members were modeled as beam elements as CBEAM elements as specified by Nastran. Beam element geometries and properties were entered to correspond with the actual physical properties. CQUAD4 plate elements were used to model gussets and the composite wall structure. MODEL CONSTRAINTS The stationary towers are bolted to a concrete pad with a total of 20 bolts. The steel super- structure bolts to the concrete pad uniformly around the base. A total of 16 bolts run about the outside and 4 more bolts are along the middle of the erne members. The bolts are positioned as close to the vertical tubes as possible. Where necessary, gussets connect the vertical tubes to the bolted channel (bottom members). The model assumes rigid connections from the bolt location to the vertical members. Therefore, the nodes at the base of the vertical tubes are Constrained along with one constraint in the center. The five constrained nodes &e fixed in both translation and rotation in all directions. MODEL LOADING All five, wind and seismic loads were generated in accordance with the UBC 1997. Wind loadii dominated the load scenarios in magmtude and severity. The details of the loadings are given in this section. Live and Dea d Loads The live load consists of 4 climbers on the structure Simultaneously. Given the nature of the attx-adion, climbers can only be on the structure when other environmental loads are minor. Whereas wind is the dominating environmental load, it is a reasonable assumption that the maximum environmental load and the live load can not occur simultaneously. The dead load is simply the dead weight of the structure and obviously exists under all conditions. c Wind Loads Wind loads were calculated for the 32 foot wall structure in accordance with UBC Division III Sections 1615 through 1625. Winds loads were generated as pressures loads on a projected area surface as speciiied in Section 1621.3 Method 2. The pressure load was multiplied by the correspondhg projected surface area to produce loads input into the finite element model. The loads were applied to the model at the mid-height level of the corresponding area as directed in Bvision III Table 16-G. Pressure acting on the surfaces was calculated using equation 20-1 as follows: where: P = design wind pressure C,= Combined height exposure and gust factor from Table 16-G. This values varies with height as follows: 0-15 ft = 1.39 15-20 ft= 1.45 20-25 ft = 1.50 Values represent exposure D for open flat land near water (worst case) C,= 1.6, pressure coefficient for a partially enclosed wall structure (Table 16-H). e- 16.4, wind stagnation pressure for 80 mph wind zone (Table 16-F) or, 3 1 .O, wind stagnation pressure for 1 10 mph wind zone (Table 16-F). L= 1 .O importance factor for a miscellaneous non-essential, non-hazard structure The projected surface area is simply the height multiplied by the width. Because the value of C, varies with height, the corresponding surface will vary accordingly. The width used in the area calculation is 7 ?4 ft for a &ont of back side wind and 5 ?4 for a side wind. Table 3 lists the determined pressures, areas, forces and the height of application for the 80 rnph wind load. Table 4 lists the values for the 1 10 mph wind load. c -5- c Front Side L rable 3 I 80 mDh Wind (a.=16.4) Section Height ce P (1Wfe) Area fiz Force (lb) Height of (fi) application (a) 0-15 1.39 36.47 112.5 4103.3 7.5 15-20 1.45 38.048 37.5 1426.8 17.5 20-25 1.50 39.36 37.5 1476.0 22.5 25-30 1.54 40.4 1 37.5 1515.4 27.5 30-32 1.62 42.51 15 637.6 31 0-15 1.39 36.47 82.5 3009.1 7.5 15-20 1.45 38.048 275 1046.3 17.5 ___ __ 20-25 I 1.5 I 39.36 I 27.5 1 1082.4 I 22.5 25-30 I 1.54 I 40.41 I 27.5 I 1111.3 I 27.5 30-32 I 1.62 I 42.5 1 I 11 467.6 I 31 Calculation of pressure forces for the 80 mph wind load. 110 mph Wind (~=3 1.0) I I I I I Sedion Height c, P (lbht’) Area ftz Force ob) Height of (fi) application (fi) 0-15 1.39 68.94 112.5 7756.2 7.5 15-20 1.45 71.92 37.5 2697.0 17.5 YO-25- I 1.50 I 39.36 ~ -1 37.5 I 2790.0 I 22.5 25-30 1 1.54 I 40.41 I 37.5 I 2864.4 I Table 4. Calculation of pressure forces fbr the 110 mph wind load. 30-32 1.62 42.5 1 15 1205.3 31 The forces determined in Tables 3 and 4 are total magnitude loads for the corresponding height. For the front load, the force values were distributed over 5 nodes at each height. The sides loads -6- c Magnitude 0.40 2.2 2.0 0.035 32 feet were distributed over 3 nodes at each height. Loads shown in the appendix reflect this distribution. Factor Magnitude I Pable 16-I) 1 .o N, (Table 164) 1.5 C, (Table 16-4) 0.36 N, = 0.54 - N, (Table 16-T) 2 .o C, (Table 16-R) 0.64 N, = 1.28 Seismic Loading Seismic loading was calculated in accordance with UBC Division 4 Sections 1626 through 1634. It was determined that the seismic loads were minor in comparison to the wind loading applied to the structure. The equations used to arrive at this conclusion are included in this section. Table 5 lists the factors used to develop the seismic loading. The structure weight was assumed to be 3600 Ibs (actual weight plus misc additional) and the center of gravity was calculated to be 16 fkt above the surface. Seismic zone 4 was also assumed, with near source type A source type. Factor z (Table 16-1 ) R (Table 16-P) no (Table 16-P) c, 4, Table 5. Seismic coefficients. Section 1634.5 equation 34-3 specifies that for seismic zone 4, the minimum base shear shall be calculated as: Equations 304,304, 30-6,30-7, and 34-2 were also calculated and found to subordinate to equation 34-3 shown above. Using the base shear of 2095 lbs, the moment applied to the base of the structure was calculated to be 33.50 kip ft. The moment at the base of the structure due to the wind loading was calculated to be 284.0 kip ft for the 110 rnph wind and 150.0 kip ft for the 80 mph wind. These calculations are included in the appendix. Upon review of the magnitudes of the loads, the seismic loads were deemed to be insignificant in comparison to the wind loads. No stress results are presented in this report as they are insignificant in comparison to the wind load induced stresses. P r- i -7- Steel Frame The wall, as designed, employs the composite wall as a structural member. The assembly used in the 80 mph wind load case bonds the wall to the steel frame along the sides of the 4x2 box section vertical members. It also connects the upper davits of the frame into the composite wall and then COMW~S the bottom lip of the wall to the 2x2 center vertical Erame member. The 1 10 mph wind load requires additional connections of the composite wall to the 2x2 center vertical frame member at 8 foot intervals between the top and bottom. The magnitude of the fiont wide load is greater due to the larger projected surface area. However, the side load induces a twisting load into the structure and results in the most severe stress state. Review of the stress contour plots in the appendix confirm this result. Figure 2 below shows the steel fiame of the climbing tower. References are made to critical high stress members or elements. A review of the stress in these members is presented in Table 6. The stresses listed are maximum combined stress at both ends A and B of the element. Stresses for both fiont and side loads are included in Table 6. -8- i r I r I 7 I T2 ;4 :3 s x 11893 ” Figure 2. Selected elements for stress review. -9- \lo -88mph Wind Load SoWmphWindLoad ElemID BoxType MaxAWi) MaxB(ksi) MaxA(ksi) MaxB(ksi) Front 1 TS 2x2x3/16 16.44 8.54 27.88 25.36 9 c 4x5.4 1.21 3.77 2.47 0.62 Table 6. Stress results for selected elements under wind and dead loads. c c c r- Under allowable stress design as dictated by UBC section 1612.3.2, a one-third increase in allowable stress is permitted for the load combination of wind and dead loads. The live loads are not included in this load combination Simply because a climber could not stay on the structure under the 80 or 110 mph wind loads. The worst case loading scenario is dictated by equation 12- 13 of section 1612.3.2. The allowable stress for all A500 Grade B materials becomes (46 hi) x 1.33 = 61.3 hi. A review of the data in Table 6 confirms that the front wind load for either the 80 mph or 110 mph wind combined with the dead load results in stress magnitudes below the allowable specified by the UBC. The maximum stresses for the 80 mph and 110 mph winds are 39.14 ksi and 23.98 ksi respectively. The 39.14 ksi values just exceeds the yield limit of A500 grade B. The results for the side wind load shows elements that exceed the yield strength of the AS00 Grade B steel but are stili below the allowable stress as dictated by the UBC. Some localized yield- may occur in the structure. All stress remain within the allowables specified by the UBC. Comvosite Material Panels Three individual composite wall elements were selected for additional review for both the 80 mph and 110 mph wind load cases. The FEA generated forces on these elements were placed into CompSAE@ for composite material fhilure analysis. These element forces are included in the appendix. Elements selected are near the bottom of the wall at the locations of the highest strain energy density. CompSAE@ was used to generate stress plots through the thickness for Sigma 1 (fiber direction) and Sigma 2 (transverse direction). The sigma 1 stress for the 80 rnph wind load range from 1.1 ksi to -5.7 ksi. Sigma 2 stresses for the 80 mph wind load range from 0.35 ksi to -2.0 ksi. The sigma 1 and sigma 2 ranges for the 110 mph wind load are 0.8 ksi to -2.4 ksi and 0.38 ksi to -0.8 ksi respectively. These stresses are below the failure limits of the composite material. CompSAE stress plots for these elements are shown in Figures 3-8. -1 1- Ply Stresses in Material Principal Coordinates r I f 1 r 0.0 -0.5 F t 5 - -1.0 a -1.5 0 -2.0 -2.5 I I I I 6.10 -0.05 0.00 0.05 0.10 z(in) Figure 3. 80 mph wind load on element 46. E i r 1 ! r i I .5 1 .o - Sigma 1 - Sigma2 Ply Stresses in Material Principal Coordinates w P d t ti 0.0 i? - 0.6 Ul -0.6 -1 .o -0.10 -0.05 0.00 0.05 0.10 z( in) - Sigma1 - Sigma2 Figure 4. 80 mph wind load on element 49. P ?-- t r i -12- t f i Ply Stresses in Material Principal Coordinates f- i r i r t P- i IL- r i r ! r 1 0 B -I t -* 6-3 L, a4 8 44 -0.10 -0.05 0.00 0.05 0.10 m) Figure 5. 80 mph Wind load on element 89. - Sigma I - Sigma 2 Ply Stresses in Material Principal Coordinates 0.0 -0.5 - -1.0 6 -1.5 a n F t II) -2.5 -2.0 -0.1 z 0 -0.05 0.00 0.05 0.10 an) Figure 6. 110 mph Wind load on element 46. - Sigma 1 - Sigma2 r i r I -13- i r i r I Ply Stresses in Material Principal Coordinates 1.0 I I I I 1 0.8 it 0.2 0.0 ! I I I -0.10 4.05 0.00 0.05 0.10 z(in) r i Figure 7. 1 10 mph Wind load on element 49. r i - Sigma 1 - Sigma2 Ply Stresses in Material Principal Coordinates 0.6 0.4 = 0.2 B 3 0.0 - Sigma1 g! 8 4.2 a - Sigma2 Q 4.4 -0.6 4.8 1 4.10 4.05 0.00 0.05 0.10 z(in) Figure 8. 110 mph Wind load on element 89. P , i r i r -14- Composite to Stee I Frame Bond Stress < Wind Load Pad Size Pad Thickness 80 mph 12ftx12ft 11 inches 110 mph 14 ft x 14 R 14 inches ' b Assuming the only connection of the composite wall to the steel frame is the bond along the sides of the 2x4 tubes, shear stress can be calculated for the load case. The front load case is the most critical as all loads are transferred fkom the composite into the steel fkame by shear. The total . load from Table 3 (80 rnph wind) is 4103.3 Ib + 1426.8 Ib + 1180.8 Ib = 6710.9 16. The total load from Table 4 (1 10 mph wind) is 7756.2 Ib + 2697.0 lb + 2232.0 Ib = 12,685.2 Ib. 'The total bonded surface area is 2*(4"x2"x24A) = 4608 in2. The shear stress in the 80 mph wind load becomes 6710.9 lb / 4608 in2 = 1.46 psi. The shear stress in the 110 mph wind load becomes 12,685.2 Ib / 4608 in2 = 2.75 psi. The shear stress is very low and wiIl not result in a separation or failure. Appendix C shows the shear tests results of a 4"xl" coupon. Failure occurred at 12.2 ksi for the coupon which relates to 3.05 - ksi shear limit. FOUNDATION Anchor Bolts The anchor bolts connecting the climbing steel structure to the concrete pad were analyzed. The fiont wind load results in the worst case loading induced into the bolts. The bolts of the tower front frame are in teGion while the bolts in the rear support structure frame are in compression. The bolts in tension are the concern. By forcing these bolts to cany the full load of the 11O'mph wind, a conservative boltedjoint is attained. The bolts can be modeled as springs which aliows all bolts to carry a portion of the load according to their positions. Calculations of bolt loads for the 110 mph wind load are included in the appendix. The bolts used in the calculations are 5!8" diameter, SAE Grade 5 bolts. The maximum tensile stress under 110 mph wind is 11.6 ksi yielding a worst case safety factor of 7.3 on the proof strength (85 ksi). SAE Grade 5 All-Thread with wedge anchors are recommended for ease of installation. Concrete Founchtion Pad The size of concrete pad to prevent tip over in the 80 mph and 110 rnph winds was calculated and can be found in the appendix. In accordance with UBC Section 1621.1, the wind load was increased 50% to achieve an overturning safety factor of 1.5 minimum under load. It should be noted that #5 rebar every 12" on-center each direction at the top and bottom of the pad is required (within 3 inches of the surfaces). A cure time of 7 days minimum is required. The required pad sizes are shown in Table 10: .. ^. -I c ALLOWABLE SOIL PRE!%URE -,.- -c. 1 c The UBC Section 1809, Table 18-I-A specifies allowable soil pressure to be 2000 lb/ft2 for sandy gravel (GW and GP soils). The soil pressure due to the dead weight and 130 mph wind loads are 227.0 Ib/fiz and 678.0 lb/fi2 respectively. The total maximum soil pressure is 905 lb/ft2 and is well within the specified allowable soil pressure. This scenario uses a 16 ft x 16 A x 17 inch thick foundation as specified in Table 5. The soil pressure due to the dead weight and 80 mph wind loads are 181 lb/flz and 526.0 lb/P respectively. The total maximum soil pressure is 707 lb/ftz and is well within the specified allowable soil pressure. This scenario uses a 14 R x I4 ft x I3 inch thick concrete foundation as specrfied in Table 5. WIRE ROPE ANALYSIS The wire rope used in the auto-belay manufactured by Spectrum Manufacturing for Rebound Action Sports / Action Amusements have been investigated by SAE personnel. ASTM F-24 standards have been adhered to in this analysis and independent testing of the cables has been performed. This section summarizes the test results, loading and specifications of the wire rope. Wire Rope Specijication The wire rope addressed in this report is: Wire Rope Classification: 6 x 37 class Construction specification: !4 inch diameter 6 x 3 1 fiber core galvanized Preferred manufacturing location: USA based Rated Strength: 4500 Ib minimum Approximate modulus: 10 MSI Wire rope end terminations: dual malleable clips, factory installed Attachment to climber: swivel end required Pulleys: Efson F6001 6 inch diameter (5.5 inch tread diameter) Wire Rope Ldng and in-use Safeiy Factors c The wire rope is loaded in two instances: the weight of a climber that goes “on-belay,” and by the bending of the rope over the pulleys as the rope moves through the auto-belay. The allowable weight of a climber is 250 lbs and results in a 250 Ib tensile load in the cable. The resulting safkty factor is 4500/250 = 18. The rope passes through Efmn F6001 pulleys which have a 5.5 inch tread diameter. The resulting rope bend diameter is 5.75 inches and results in a D/d ratio of 5.75”/0.25” = 23. -16- c Pull Rate Quasi-static Quasi-static Recommended Safety Factors andD/d Ratios Measured Strength 6560 lb 6410 Ib c- Impulse IItlpUiSe c 3890 lb 5090 Ib .. - c No specific tensile strength safety fictor is given for Wire ropes used in auto-belay applications. However, given the nature of the auto-belay, elevator codes have been used as acceptable standards for safety factors. ANSI AI 7.1 - 1978 specifies a safety fictor of 9.20 for elevators with velocities up to 300 fdsecond (204 mph). The auto-belay, when functioning within normal parameters, always falls within this speed limitation. The Wire Rope Users Manual published by the Wire Rope Corporation of America lists minimum diameter ratios @/d) for 6x37 classifhition rope in the range of 20 - 26, depending on actual construction. The '/a inch diameter 6 x 3 1 fiber core galvanized wire rope used with the Ebn F6001 pulleys falls within the recommended range. WIRE ROPE TEST RESULTS Endurance Test Under the direction of SAE personnel, Spectrum Manufacturing automated a test stand to endurance test the !A inch diameter 6 x 3 1 fiber core galvanized wire rope in an auto-belay. A 250 lb weight was used to simulate worst-case conditions. Over a three month period of the between September and December 2000, 50,000 cycles were completed. The test stand was located outside and was exposed to harsh weather conditions during the test. Upon completion of the endurance test, sections of the wire rope were inspected for broken wires and damage. No broken wires were found, and the rope wear was determined to be within acceptable limitations. c Strength Test Spectrum Manufhcturing personnel prepared four M inch diameter 6 x 3 1 fiber core galvanized wire rope test specimen for strength testing at Rasmussen Equipment Company in Salt Lake City, UT A su1~~~18fy of the strength tests is given in Table 6. I Cable: % inch diameter 6 I 31 fiber core galvanized I .. . - -17- Cable Inspection Techniques c. c c A rigorous inspection routine is not only recommended, but required. Proper inspection will eliminate the chance of using a wire rope beyond its useid life. The inspection routine listed in the Maintenance Manual published by Rebound Action Sports / Action Amusements is augmented here and it is recommended that the procedure be followed rigorously. This inspection method is visual and adheres to the applicable standards published in the United States. Figure 9. Single Wire Inspection Criteria for the 6x31 Wire Rope. -18- .. . - REPLACE THE WIRE ROPE IF ANY OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE TRUE: (Refer to the Figure above.) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6x3 1 cable: If any of the individual wires in a strand have a flat spot of more than ?h the diameter of the smallest wire as shown in the figure above. If there is a single broken wire in any strand. If there are 50,OOO or more cycles on a wall. If the cables have been on a ride for 1 year (1 2 months). If there are any twists, fiays, or kinks. Win Rope Inspection Criteria Recommended by Various Agencies and Manufacturers .. c c c Governing agencies in the United States have published guidelines pertaining to wire rope use, maintenance, inspection and general specifications. Further, most wire rope mandhcturers have additional guidelines for the use, maintenance and inspection of their cables. These guidelines and codes set a precedence for the industry standard methods of use, maintenance and inspection of wire ropes. Deviation fiom these recommendations would be viewed as questionable by most engineers with experience in the industry. To justif$ the inspection method recommended by Rebound Action Sports / Action Amusements, the most noted codes and guidelines have been obtained and read by SAE Inc engineers. The codes obtained by SAE Inc engineers include: ASME (American Society of Mechanical Engineers) International Publication ASIbWl330.5~ - Mobile and Locomotive Cranes. 1998, ISBN#: 0791 822753 This code is a revision of the ASWANSI B30.5-1989. It applies specifically to applications similar to the Space Shutm ride. Wire Rme Users Manual. Third Edition 1993 This text gives a summary compilation of the recommended practices for wire rope use in general applications. OSHA Wire Rope Excerpts - General Standards, Vol37, Number 202, October 1972. This general standard is a compilation of the ASMUANSI standards that exist now as the ASME/B30.XX series. These are the forerunner to current standards. “Wire Rope Inspection”, Report #I 07. This report gives guidelines to the inspection methods appropriate to identi@ wire rope damage. a. b. Wire Rope Technical Board C. d. Leeschen Wire Rope Company Each of these codes specify, in general, the same criteria for inspection of wire ropes. Additional ASME codes spec@ inspection criteria for additional applications including, but not limited to, personnel hoist (elevators), overhead cranes, material hoist etc. The ASME code governing Mobile and Locomotive Cranes is very stringent. It is the most stringent code that has any applicability to the auto-belay. The highlights of the inspection guiddinddes listed above are included in the next table of this document to set a comparison reference for the Rebound Action Sports / Action Amusements guidelines. Note that the inspection procedures outlined in the referenced codes are all visual inspections. -19- , c .\ - . .&. - c .- , - c 8. 7 ,. - :- .- .- .. c zomparison of Wire Rope Inspection Criteria. Inspection Criteria Requiring Rope Replacement ASMEtB30.5c Wire Rope Usen Guide, 3'' Edition Crpnes no spectfication given 1/3 diameter worn on any wire. (See Length of Wire Rope Service Abrasion no specification given ln diameter worn on any wire, see figure below) specific governing code Rope Stmtcb no specificatim given when the rate of stretch increases der initialbreatr-inperiod Reduction in Rope Diameter 1/48 inch on cables 1/4" diameter when accompanied with &&cant rope stretch; otherwise not spenfic Corrosion not specific if accompanied by metal pitting; ifrust exists Klnkr, Twists, Crushing "Bird Caging" any - replace wire rope any defect - replace unless defect can be removed E2llOVed any - replace any - replace unless cable is repairable my defect - replace unless defect can be Heat / Electrical if wires are fused or discolored Damaged End Attachments Non-destrurtive diameters New criteria: 4 broken wires in one The ASMElB30.5 inspection criteria is very specific on the visual inspections required. The code is specifically designed to allow an inspector to accurately infer the status of the wire rope core from a tborough inspection of the wire rope's broken wires in a strand, abrasion of the wires in the strands, and the change in the diameter of the overall rope. The inspection criteria requires a thorough visual inspection of the rope. The number of broken strands is a key aspect of all of the ASME codes. A summary of the ASME code allowable broken strands is included here due to the primary role it plays in determining the integrity of the rope core. 'c -20- .. c '2 .. c c ASME CODE GOVERNING WEEN TO REPLACE WIRE ROPE- BASED ON NUMBER OF BROKEN WIRES Number Broken Wires Number Bmken Wires ASME Standard Erluipment Connection ASW30.2 oveThead&Gantry CraneS 12** 4 Not Specified ASMElB30.4 Portal, Tower & pillar Cranes 6** 3 3 2 AsMWB30.5 rev b Rotation Resistmat Rope Crawler, Locomotive & Truck Cranes Retirement criteria based w number of broken wim found in le@ of rope qad to 6 time8 rope di8- mete- 2 broken wirer maximum, and 30 times mpe dl8mete1-4 broken wlm maximum. AsMEIB30.5 Running Rope 6.. 3 3 2 ASMEB30.6 Denicks 3 - 2 AShWB30.7 Base Mounted Drum Hoists 64'1 3 3 2 ASh4EA330.8 Floating Cranes & Dem& 6** 3 3 2 ASAdm330.16 overhead Hoists 12** 4 Not Specified ANSVA10.4 Personnel Hoists 6** 3 2** 2 ANSYA10.5 Material Hoists 6** ~ ~- Notspecified Notspecified ** Also remove for 1 valley breair -21- >.- c Wire Rope Strength Test Certi$kates ,/ c n RASMUSSEN EDUIPMENT COMPANY Certificate of Proof Load THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE WIRE ROPE SLINGSINYLON SL I NGSlCHAIN SLINGSASS EM Bt l ESlF ITTINGS HAVE BEEN PROOF LOADED TO CUSTOMER'S SPEClFlCATlONS AND INSTRUCTIONS IN CONFORMANCE WiTH THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN: cL-4 .=---I CUSTOMER NAME 34" CUSTOMER ORDER NUMBERS\ 0 13- RASMUSSEN DOCUMENT NUMBER OUANTITY j .. SLINOASSEMBLY/FITTINGS DESCRIPTION gr3\5l-7 vq" (p x37 /y -. nh ,9Ce - -- .. . PROOF LOADED TO z. POUNDS IN A STRAIGHT PULL TITLE ,I IN PLEASE READ CAREFULLY THERE IS NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED AS TO THE FITNESS OF THE PROOF LOADED SLINGSIASSEMBLIES!FlTTlNGS TO CONTINUE IN SERVICE. SLINGS! ASSEMELIES/FITTINGS WERE PROOF LOADED ACCORDING TO THE CUSTOMER'S SPECIFICATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS. IT IS THE CUSTOMER'S (USER) RESPONSIBILITY TO PERFORM SLlNG/ASSEMBLY/FlTTlNG INSPECTlON ON A REGULAR BASIS TO ASSURE COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE CODES AND REGULATIONS. HEAVY DUTY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT SALES SERWCE - RENTALS UTAH: 3333 W~alZlOOSoulh~SeliL.keC~. Utah641 19ITol~hone(801)972-5588 WATSLINE IN UTAH: (000) €6246031 WITS UNE IN WESTERNSTATES'(B00) 453-80321FAX: (801) 972-2215 c c -22- . .- - . .., c RASMUSSEN EOUIPMENT COMPANY Certificate of Proof Load THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE WIRE ROPE SLINGStNYLON SLINGSICHAIN SLlNGSIASSEMBLlESlFlTTlNGS HAVE BEEN PROOF LOADED TO CUSTOMER'S SPECIFICATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN: c- CUSTOMER NAME QUANTITY \ " I. CUSTOMER ORDER NUMBERSL 0 LL RASMUSSEN DOCUMENT NUMBER PROOF LOADED TO 5 [)9() POUNDS IN A STRAIGHT PULL PLEASE READ CAREFULLY THERE IS NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED AS TO THE FITNESS OF THE PROOF LOADED SLINGSIASSEMSLIESIFITTINGS TO CONTINUE IN SERVICE. SLINGS/ ASSEMBLlESlFlTTlNGS WERE PROOF LOADED ACCORDING TO THE CUSTOMER'S SPECIFICATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS. IT IS THE CUSTOMER'S (USER) RESPONSIGILITY TO PERFORM SLINGIASSEMBLYIFITTING INSPECTION ON A REGULAR BASIS TO ASSURE COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE CODES AND REGULATIONS HEAVY DUTY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT SALES SEff VICE * RENTALS UTAH: 3333 Was1 2100 Swulh I Salt We City, Utah ad1 19 I Telephone (801) 972-5580 WAE LINE IN UTAH: (Boo) 662-6603 I WATS LINE IN WESTERN STATES. (em) 153-8032 I FAX: (e0 I) 972.2215 -23- c RASMUSSEN EQUIPMENT COMPANY 7 Certificate of Proof Load .. i - THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE WIRE ROPE SLlNGSlNYLON SLINGSICHAIN SLINGS/ASSEMBLIESIFITTlNGS HAVE BEEN PROOF LOADED TO CUSTOMER'S SPECIFICATIONS AND INSTdUCTlONS IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN: I. CUSTOMER ORDER NUMBER b-1 QUANTITY RASMUSSEN DOCUMENT NUMBER - I/ ''( SLINWASSEMBLY~FITT~NGS DESCRIPTION P \ \5 7 T u Y 3 7 /=.e . PROOF LOADED TO G, q/[) POUNDS IN A STRAIGHT PULL. PLEASE READ CAREFULLY THERE IS NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED AS TO THE FITNESS OF THE PROOF LOADED SLINGSIASSEMBLIESIFITTINGS TO CONTINUE IN SERVICE. SLINGS, ASSEMBLlESlFlTTlNGS WERE PROOF LOADED ACCORDlNG TO THE CUSTOMER'S SPECIFICATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS. IT IS THE CUSTOMER'S (USER) RESPONSIBILITY TO PERFORM SLINGIASSEMBLYIFITTING INSPECTION ON A REGULAR BASlS TO ASSURE COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE CODES AND REGULATIONS. HEAVY DUTY CONSTRUCTION EwPrnmT SALES SERVICE 4 RENTALS UTAH: 3333 Weir 2100 Swlh I Sal: Lake Ctry. Ugh E4 t 19 I Tolophone (801) 972.538 WATS LINE IN UTAH: (800) 662 8603 I WATS UNE W WESTERN STATES'(8W) 153-8032 / FAX: (801) 972.22 15 -24- RASMUSSEN E~UIPMENT COMPANY .. c ,.,- c Certificate of Proof Load THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE WIRE ROPE SLlNGSlNYLON SLINGS/CHAIN SLJNGSIASSEMBLIESIFITTJNGS HAVE BEEN PROOF LOADED TO CUSTOMER'S SPECIFICATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN: CUSTOMER NAME CUSTOMER ORDER NUMBERT;;h m OUANTI'PI ! RASMUSSEN DOCUMENT NUMBER J// 7 SLING'ASSEMBLY/FIlTINGS DESCRIPTION \\57T CI /nY.?;) F? .. ---- ~~ ~~ PROOF LOADED TO (q5LCY POUNDS IN A STRAIGHT PULL PLEASE READ CAREFUI.LY THERE IS NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED AS TO THE FITNESS OF THE PROOF LOADED SLlNGSlASSEMBLlESlFlTTlNGS TO CONTINUE IN SERVICE. SLINGS' ASSEMBLIES/FITTINGS WERE PROOF LOADED ACCORDING TO THE CUSTOMER'S SPECIFICATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS. IT IS THE CUSTOMER'S (USER) RESPONSIBJLITY TO PERFORM SLlNGlASSEMBLYlFlTTlNG INSPECTION ON A REGULAR BASIS TO ASSURE COMPLIANCE WITH APPL ICAELE CODES AND REGUUTIONS. HEAVY DUTY CONSTRUCTION EQUlPMENT SALES SERVICE. RENTALS UTAH: 3333 VJesl2 100 south I Sal1 Lake Cify. Utah 841 19 I Tolephone (801) 972-5588 WATS LINE IN UTAH: (800) 662-8603 I W4TS LINE IN WESTERN STATES: (600) 453.8032 1 FAX: (801) 972-2215 -25- HYDRAULIC CYLINDERS / AUTO-BELAY SYSTEM Figure 10 shows the general concept of the auto-belay system. The auto-belay system uses two independent hydraulic cylinders on each cable-pulley system. The auto-belay is designed such that failure of one cylinder does not lead to failure of the system. Also, failure of the air-oil tank will not lead to failure of the system. Each cylinder is plumbed independently to a common air-oil tank (accumulator), with proper valves and plumbing to ensure that failure of the system could result only through a minimum of two separate, independent single point failures. In this manner, redundancy is designed into the system for dety considerations. Figure IO. Auto-belay concept. The design load assumed for the cyIinder specification was 250 Ib maximum. The auto-belay system uses an 8-to-1 multiplier on the cylinder displacement, and results in a 8 times multiplication of the cable load seen by the cylinder pair. Therefore, a 250 lb climber on-belay induces a 2000 Ib tensile force into the cylinder air. The cylinders are 1.5" diameter ID with 1 " diameter pushrods. The net cross section is 0.98 in P . The pressure expected in each cylinder for a 250 lb climber is 1019 psi. -26- SHEAVE BOLTS The bolts connecting all sheaves to the structure are SAE Grade 8, 5/8" diameter. The most severely loaded bolt is in the lower pulley head, which contains 4 pulleys as shown in Figure 1 1. The bolts are not torqued, but are caused to bend due to the sheave-cable loading. The bending load in the bolt due to a 250 lb climber is 1000 in lb, and results in a bending stress of 41.7 ksi. The proof strength of Grade 8 bolts is 120 ksi, and the tensile strength is 150 ksi. Because the bolt is a wear item, it should be c e- . -- c c replaced at the time the cable is replaced. Forces due to the cables around the sheaves: F = 2 x climber weight 518" 0 SAE Grade 8 pulley housing Figure 11. Pulley housing - sheave pin connection loading. -27- FAILURE ANALYSIS A step-wise failure analysis of the components in the climbing wall structure is useful in understanding the potential problems and the design criteria. The critical components in the load path connecting a climber to the auto-belay system include: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. climbing harness able sheave bolts (pins) hydraulic cylinder@) / Auto-Belay structural members The climbing harness and cable are wear items that require regular inspection. These components are designed to withstand the most stringent loads induced by climbers on the wall. However, these items are wear item that will likely require replacement due to wear issues connected to the use of the structure. Inspection of these components must be accomplished on a regular basis as specified by the manufacturer. There are 4 sheave pins in the load path connecting the climber into the auto-belay system. Two pins connect pulleys onto the davits. Each pin is a 518” diameter SAE Grade 8 bolt, and connects a single pulley onto the davit. Failure of either of these pins would not allow a climber to wall back to ground level as the cable would be caught by structural members. The pins in the pulley heads are critical members. The analysis performed and reported in this document shows that a 250 lb climber induces a bending stress of 41.7 ksi in the bolt. The safety factor against bolt yield is 3.1, and against bolt tensile strength is 3.6. AISC Manual of Steel Construction [89] lists the tensile fatigue loading of A490 bolts (essentially equal to SAE Grade 8) for 500,000 or more cycles to be 38 ksi maximum. Because the shear pins are wear items, the pins should be replaced periodically as dictated by inspection of the pulley housings (on the order of every 500,000 cycles). The hydraulic cylinders are Critical components on the load path. he to the nature of the hydraulic system implemented in the auto-belay system, it was deemed appropriate to have redundancy designed into the system to prevent catastrophic fiilure of the system in the event of a single hydraulic cylinder (or associated plumbing) failure. Failure of the air-oil tank and any plumbing in the auto-belay system will not result in catastrophic failure of the system. In the event of all hydraulic hoses between the tank and the cylinders failing, hydraulic fluid fkom the cylinders would simply be spilled as a climber goes on belay. A climber would be lowered to ground level with little to no perceivable difkrence in the system performance. The auto-belay would not work subsequent to a hydraulic fiiiure of this nature. Failure of structural components in the load path could result in system failure. Failure of the davit support structure would not result in a climber falling unimpeded to the ground as the wire rope would still have to pass over the fiber-glass climbing wall. Fahe of the top pulley mount would be catastrophic, but the stress levels in the structure are significantly lower than the stresses in other support members. Failure of the cylinder mounts (bottom) would also be catastrophic, but it would require 2 single point failures to initiate the 111 failure. -28- I. . c c c c References AISC [89] Boresi [85] Dowling 1931 Juvinall[91] Peterson [74] Roark 1751 Sines [59] UBC [97] Wire Rop[93] American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC). 1989 Mmd of Steel Constawction: AIZwubIe Stress &sign, AISC, Chicago. A. P. Boresi and 0. M. Sidebottom. 1985 AbvancedMechanics of Materials, John Wiley & Sons, New York. N. E. Dowling. 1993 Mechanical Behavior of MateriaIs, Prentice-Hall, hc, New Jersey. R C. Juvinall and K. M. Marshek. 1991 Fmahentals of Machine Component Design, John Wiley & Sons, New York. R. E. Peterson. 1974 Stress Concentration Factors, John Wiley & Sons, New York. R. J. Roark and W. C. Young. 1975 Fomh for Stress andstraln, 5th Ed. McGraw-Hill, New York. J. E. Shigley and L. D. Mitchell. 1983 Mechanical Engineering Design, McGraw- Hill, New York. J. E. Shigley and C. R. Mischke. 1989 Mechanical Engrneering Design, McGraw- Hill, New Yo&. G. Sines. 1959 “Behavior of Metals under Complex Static and Alternating Stresses,” Metal Fatigue, G. Sines and J. L. Waisman, eds., McGraw-Hill, New Yo& pp. 145- 169. International Conference of Building Of€icials, 1997 “Uniform Building Code Vol2”. Wire Rope Technical Board, 1993. Wire Rope Users Manual. PO Technical Board Box 286, Woodstock, MD, 21 163-0286. -29- APPENDIX A -30- , I‘ -(J “I 4 314" 7 m 4 3-2" Q h- i! al m P e L- p. 7 11. I It uan-.2001/UPPER FRAMESB2' I UCOOS 2001-!3TATIONARY/32' 46w.8wa n Btdc HYDErAMcm'NIaMm FM45Efl90864 i 32' UF TANDEM DETAILS PRODUCTLINEREBOUND ACTION SPORT5 UF-321-2 ,t!"D I UmR WES I82 -3 1- r ! i rl 0 0 (\1 c c, r Q-I c\I m i I r r r r m W N w m ro m m N 0 I- m N N d m W N? 9. : m m 01 N N 0 m P cu el W 0 N m W' 0 N .' ? P N d r N rt m 0 m N m m cu N, cu 0 m r- 04 Fl w m, m W N 9. m m 4, m. cu N 0 P N m m 04, 0 cu a! r r t r f i c hl m I r r r r r m In 0 0 m d r m 0 W m OD m -r m m m -r m m 0 0 d .. .. .. \D m - m hl .-I m 0 0. +, r c P- rl 0 0 N I 4 V c, I- tw N m I r 2 H i ”, i ’ ‘, r r r r B r 'H 5 G 3 '3 .hrn r r r P P 7 I r r r r r r F P r r f - - r r r r 'XI T.4 m I r- cm on r i i ri 0 0 c\1 c V c LI i I : H r d N N 10 0. r d N P- In l-4 9. 07 m v) m m m m m 2 m m h h)-- d -7 N d -7 -J. d N CT r N; m; d N I- m * N m m m. m m m m m 00 m m. 0. \ F \ ,' N-- 1-m r f L r-i 0 0 hl I n r & I 8 ! I? m c F I 4J lu hl m I r 2 I I H c c, i ! s 5 1 c l i r r r W W m 4; T / m 4 0 0 9. N P m d ril 0 0 b. m N OD W 'N m P N m W m 6 N el m W W 4 , m rn APPENDIX c P' c c c c c c c -32- I I v) W 5 k W z z W n a m aa v) W V e s W 3 rn 5 W z: I n d _. n 3 U W VI + 2 W I W -I W -J a e W I- < -J H ri n U 3 U z H VI W V UeZ t .r 0 W U v) r P E 0 rl rl I N CI W v) ct J 9. w 0 3LL v- a rl 0 0 N Ln N d N d .. .. 7 c ... mmw I i LL .. w L 0 W o? n Ndh mmw ... I d W OI m n VI - r- W c fi rl LL I w y. N m VI Lo m N" +++ www hNd Lnm4 uwew mob CndW >mmo ... F W NNh I 10 S .C PI U L 0 LL W S m L s E W z: > x W w m L r w t W E 0 r m t 0 t W m >. X W w (d 'F r n aJ U L 0 U W C 2 n E W ZE > X aJ w m r n U W U L 0 L W 5 L m n E W E > 01 +J m n c w E 0 z 0, S 0 t 01 m X W U rd E -r c n w S W E 0 5 01 t 'IJ S W m * aJ w m *I- F n W U L 0 u. W C 21 E n E > aJ w fa r n L .. .. +J aJw ww am rr nn c c 1 I f w 5 8 W z H z w m n 8 w W V cr 0 U W 3 in z W r I rl 0 0 N 00 e W N * rl m4.J Or aJ LE IW Er W .r- L u. .. w L 0 aJ p: .. .. a P B fi rl U. 1 w rld0 I I+ www Inbur ... mmd I drfd Ill www rl0m hhO Xooood zmmd hVrl NhOO mwur ... 0 00 c U 0) 4.J .L 0 P W & rl N" W ul I 0. P w +++ www waoo >Nmm XhdN LOW* ow* OO*m c c cn w E aJ E r w ul ul W m 7 ... mrnd I N" +++ www bNm Nmh >Nulur uw*m rnhd NrlO NdW ... It c .I c .. P W u L 0 u. W E I L .n r z X W w m L F w S W E 0 L 0, E '23 S Q) m > X W w 0 .r m r W u L 0 u. W t L m n z P z X 01 c1 (d r- n w S W E 0 z CII r TI C W m *F t? W +J I c a W U L 0 U PI C I L E aJ E * W +J Id n r n W U L 0 U. W S I L n E 5 > W 4J m n r c, C W E 0 I PI E: U S aJ m 7 X aJ +J m n c +J c PI E 0 I ul S U t PI m > W w .F m n F L .. .. 4.J ii- ife .-_ I, 17/61 c 00s coo -n c ! ! ! ! ! I 1 ! I I , I I I i I I I ! n i / e/o I c COQ UI20 -r4 c c c c ; 1 ! I I i 1 I I I I ! Pm,, = ! c c 000 me3 -0 c @ c rc c c c I I I L\x 12-13 -7 .- I 3.4 Gp4t i .. . .' .. . 1/31/01 .__.- U.S. DEPARTMENT OB LABOR. .... Occvpat~onol Safrtv and Horlrh Adddsvdon ... -. Form No.6 noduct Description enificate No. KCSO083 sol No. YCSOO63-Ol Order No. '72131.20.:;&dq~: .. _.2X SO00 FT, 114' 6X31WS RR GlPS --~is!ributorRASMUSSEN 'EUUIPMENT , , ..,_ . . ...... CERTIFICATE OF EXAMINATiON AND TEST OF WIRE ROPE BEFORE WNO TAKEN MOUSE Form prescribed by UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT of LABOR for use whm cmltkauon ir psrformd to the This certificate. when properly executed. Is occe'ptable to the United States Dopanmsnr of Labor 83 being h accordance rquicemenu ol 29 CFR Psrt 191 9. I ,ith the requiremento of 29 CFR 191 8.1 2b). 1. 2 : 3. 5. 7. 8. 9. Name aird address of manufacturer or suDplier ot the rope: LESCHEN WIRE ROPE '1220 CAPITAL OR. CHICAGO. IL. 60101 A divkion of Wlre Rope Corporation of America, Inc. St. Joseph. Missouri USA Diymeter of roo6 114' Numbor 01 strands 6 4. Number of whs nor rvond 324 by RlGW REGULAR 6. Grade of ropo OlPS Date of lcrf of oemple of row 1 1121100 Lwd at which sample brokn 7,001 LBS. Safe working lord. aubjecK KO any sated. qualifying conditions such as minimum &we diameter. dlrca tsnsik load. -2 m _- etc. IF THE DESIGN FACTOR IS 5. THE SAFE WORKlNG LOAD IS 1.400 pawds - ... .... .. ..: .. ._ ,. .?..,' . ' 10. Name and addrags of the organization carrying out the examination and test LESCHEN WIRE ROPE 009 N.'.2ND ST.. ' .... ... .' ' : < f :. - ... ... ., ' '. ?. 1 SAMEAS(1) . .. JOSEPH. MO. 64502 '* . .Y 11. 'Name end address of the organization isruing thio certificate if not stated In lCam~J~, I Z. Position ot SiQf~tOfy in issuing organization ' CUSTOMER SERVICE REPRESENTAT~VE .. 1- :-> . .; . ... ... .. .,.. ' . .. .:.. .......... .... .. .. I*; .-' .- . ...... . I. ... .. ..': . .. -, . L -9- J J) 4 c, 6)