EN 13001-1:2015

SLOVENSKI STANDARD
01-julij-2015
1DGRPHãþD
SIST EN 13001-1:2005+A1:2009
SIST EN 13001-1:2005+A1:2009/AC:2010
äHUMDYL.RQVWUXLUDQMHVSORãQRGHO6SORãQDQDþHODLQ]DKWHYH
Cranes - General design - Part 1: General principles and requirements
Krane - Konstruktion allgemein - Teil 1: Allgemeine Prinzipien und Anforderungen
Appareils de levage à charge suspendue - Conception générale - Partie 1: Principes
généraux et prescriptions
Ta slovenski standard je istoveten z: EN 13001-1:2015
ICS:
53.020.20 Dvigala Cranes
2003-01.Slovenski inštitut za standardizacijo. Razmnoževanje celote ali delov tega standarda ni dovoljeno.

EUROPEAN STANDARD
EN 13001-1
NORME EUROPÉENNE
EUROPÄISCHE NORM
April 2015
ICS 53.020.20 Supersedes EN 13001-1:2004+A1:2009
English Version
Cranes - General design - Part 1: General principles and
requirements
Appareils de levage à charge suspendue - Conception Krane - Konstruktion allgemein - Teil 1: Allgemeine
générale - Partie 1 : Principes généraux et prescriptions Prinzipien und Anforderungen
This European Standard was approved by CEN on 16 February 2015.

CEN members are bound to comply with the CEN/CENELEC Internal Regulations which stipulate the conditions for giving this European
Standard the status of a national standard without any alteration. Up-to-date lists and bibliographical references concerning such national
standards may be obtained on application to the CEN-CENELEC Management Centre or to any CEN member.

This European Standard exists in three official versions (English, French, German). A version in any other language made by translation
under the responsibility of a CEN member into its own language and notified to the CEN-CENELEC Management Centre has the same
status as the official versions.

CEN members are the national standards bodies of Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia,
Finland, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania,
Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and United
Kingdom.
EUROPEAN COMMITTEE FOR STANDARDIZATION
COMITÉ EUROPÉEN DE NORMALISATION

EUROPÄISCHES KOMITEE FÜR NORMUNG

CEN-CENELEC Management Centre: Avenue Marnix 17, B-1000 Brussels
© 2015 CEN All rights of exploitation in any form and by any means reserved Ref. No. EN 13001-1:2015 E
worldwide for CEN national Members.

Contents Page
Foreword . 3
Introduction . 4
1 Scope . 5
2 Normative references . 5
3 Terms, definitions, symbols and abbreviations . 5
3.1 Terms and definitions . 5
3.2 Symbols and abbreviations . 6
4 Safety requirements and/or measures . 8
4.1 General . 8
4.2 Proof calculation . 8
4.2.1 General principles . 8
4.2.2 Models of cranes and loads .11
4.2.3 Simulation of load actions .11
4.2.4 Load combinations and load effects .11
4.2.5 Limit states .12
4.2.6 Proof of competence .12
4.2.7 Methods for the proof of competence .13
4.3 Classification.15
4.3.1 General .15
4.3.2 Total numbers of working cycles .16
4.3.3 Average linear or angular displacements .17
4.3.4 Frequencies of loads .19
4.3.5 Positioning of loads .20
4.4 Stress histories .21
4.4.1 General .21
4.4.2 Frequencies of stress cycles .22
4.4.3 Transformation of the identified stress cycles into cycles with constant mean stress or
constant stress ratio .23
4.4.4 Classification of stress histories .25
Annex A (informative) Selection of a suitable set of crane standards for a given application .28
Annex B (informative) Discreet and continuous distributions .30
Annex ZA (informative) Relationship between this European Standard and the Essential
Requirements of EU Directive 2006/42/EC .33
Bibliography .34

Foreword
This document (EN 13001-1:2015) has been prepared by Technical Committee CEN/TC 147 “Cranes -
Safety”, the secretariat of which is held by BSI.
This European Standard shall be given the status of a national standard, either by publication of an identical
text or by endorsement, at the latest by October 2015, and conflicting national standards shall be withdrawn at
the latest by October 2015.
Attention is drawn to the possibility that some of the elements of this document may be the subject of patent
rights. CEN [and/or CENELEC] shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights.
This document supersedes EN 13001-1:2004+A1:2009.
This document has been prepared under a mandate given to CEN by the European Commission and the
European Free Trade Association, and supports essential requirements of EU Directive(s).
For relationship with EU Directive(s), see informative Annex ZA, which is an integral part of this document.
The major changes in this revision are in 4.2.7.2, 4.3.3 and 4.4.4. Annex B has been added.
This European Standard is one part of EN 13001. The parts are the following ones:
— Part 1: General principles and requirements;
— Part 2: Load actions;
— Part 3-1: Limit States and proof competence of steel structure;
— Part 3-2: Limit states and proof of competence of wire ropes in reeving systems;
— Part 3-3: Limit states and proof of competence of wheel/rail contacts;
— Part 3-4: Limit states and proof of competence of machinery [currently at Enquiry stage];
— Part 3-5: Limit states and proof of competence of forged hooks [Technical Specification].
For the relationship with other European Standards for cranes, see Annex A.
According to the CEN-CENELEC Internal Regulations, the national standards organizations of the following
countries are bound to implement this European Standard: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech
Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, France, Germany, Greece,
Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal,
Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and the United Kingdom.
Introduction
This European Standard has been prepared to be a harmonized standard to provide one means for the
mechanical design and theoretical verification of cranes to conform to the essential health and safety
requirements of the Machinery Directive, as amended. This standard also establishes interfaces between the
user (purchaser) of the crane and the designer, as well as between the designer and the component
manufacturer, in order to form a basis for selecting cranes and components.
This European Standard is a type C standard as stated in EN ISO 12100.
The crane parts, components or machinery concerned and the extent to which hazards are covered are
indicated in the scope of this standard.
When provisions of this type C standard are different from those, which are stated in type A or B standards,
the provisions of this type C standard take precedence over the provisions of the other standards, for
machines that have been designed and built according to the provisions of this type C standard.
1 Scope
This European Standard specifies general principles and requirements to be used together with EN 13001-2
and the EN 13001-3 series of standards, and as such they specify conditions and requirements on design to
prevent mechanical hazards of cranes, and a method of verification of those requirements.
NOTE Specific requirements for particular types of crane are given in the appropriate European Standard for the
particular crane type.
The following is a list of significant hazardous situations and hazardous events that could result in risks to
persons during normal use and foreseeable misuse. Clause 4 of this European Standard is necessary to
reduce or eliminate the risks associated with the following hazards:
a) instability of the crane or its parts (tilting);
b) exceeding the limits of strength (yield, ultimate, fatigue);
c) elastic instability of the crane or its parts (buckling, bulging);
d) exceeding temperature limits of material or components;
e) exceeding the deformation limits.
This European Standard is applicable to cranes which are manufactured after the date of approval by CEN of
this standard and serves as reference base for the European Standards for particular crane types.
2 Normative references
The following documents, in whole or in part, are normatively referenced in this document and are
indispensable for its application. For dated references, only the edition cited applies. For undated references,
the latest edition of the referenced document (including any amendments) applies.
EN 13001-2, Crane safety — General design — Part 2: Load actions
EN ISO 12100:2010, Safety of machinery — General principles for design — Risk assessment and risk
reduction (ISO 12100:2010)
ISO 2394, General principles on reliability for structures
ISO 4306-1:2007, Cranes — Vocabulary — Part 1: General
3 Terms, definitions, symbols and abbreviations
3.1 Terms and definitions
For the purposes of this document, the terms and definitions given in EN ISO 12100:2010 and, for the
definitions of loads, in ISO 4306-1:2007, Clause 6, and the following apply.
3.2 Symbols and abbreviations
The symbols and abbreviations used in this part of EN 13001 are given in Table 1.
Table 1 — Symbols and abbreviations
Symbols,
Description
abbreviations
admσ Allowable (admissible) stress
C Total number of working cycles
C Number of working cycles where a load i is handled
i
C Number of working cycles of task r
r
Dh0 to Dh9
Classes of average linear displacement X for hoisting
lin
Dt0 to Dt9
Classes of average linear displacement X for traversing (trolley)
lin
Dc0 to Dc9
Classes of average linear displacement X for travelling (crane)
lin
Da0 to Da5 Classes of average angular displacement X
ang
f
Characteristic loads including dynamic factors
i
F
Combined loads from load combination j (limit state method)
j
Combined loads from load combination j (allowable stress method)
F
j
k Stress spectrum factor, based on m of detail under consideration
m
kQ
Load spectrum factor
kQ Load spectrum factor for task r
r
Limit in damage calculation
lim D
limσ Limit design stress
m Inverse slope of the log σ /log N curve
a
nˆ Total number of stress cycles
n
Number of stress cycles of class ij
ij
(r)
Number of stress cycles of class ij occurring each time task r is carried out
n
ij
nn,
Service frequency of position i or j
ri rj
n ( R or σ ) Number of stress cycles with stress amplitude σ ( R or σ )
m a m
Number of stress cycles with amplitude σ ( R or σ )
n ( R or σ )
a,i m
i m
Number of stress cycles to failure by fatigue
N
N Number of cycles at reference point
D
Symbols,
Description
abbreviations
p
Average number of accelerations

Classes of average numbers of accelerations p
to P
P , P
to Q Classes of load spectrum factors kQ
Q
Q Maximum value of Q for all tasks r
r
Q Magnitude of load i
i
Q Maximum load for task r
r
R Characteristic resistance of material, connection or component
d
Stress ratio
R
s
Stress history parameter
S to S Classes of stress history parameters
s
02 9
S
Load effect in section k of a member (limit state method)
k
Load effect in section k of a member (allowable stress method)
S
k
to U
Classes of total numbers of working cycles C
UU,
xx,
Displacement of the drive under consideration to serve position i or j
ri rj
Average displacement during task r
x
r
Average linear or angular displacement
X , X
lin ang
αα,,α Angles between horizontal line and lines of constant N in the σσ− plane
12 am
α
Relative number of working cycles for task r
r
γ
Overall safety factor
f
γ
Resistance coefficient
m
γ
Risk coefficient
n
γ
Partial safety factor
p
γ Reduced partial safety factor
p
ν Relative total number of stress cycles
σ Stress amplitude
a
σ (R), σ (R)
ˆ Stress amplitude, maximum stress amplitude for constant stress ratio R
a
a
σ (σ ), σ (σ )
ˆ Stress amplitude, maximum stress amplitude for constant mean stress σ
a m m m
a
σ Stress amplitude of range i
a,i
Symbols,
Description
abbreviations
σ Lower extreme value of stress cycle
b
σ
Design stress in element l (limit state method)
l
σ
Design stress in element l (allowable stress method)
l
σ
Stresses in element l resulting from S (limit state method)
k
1l
σ
Stresses in element l resulting from S (allowable stress method)
1l
k
σ
Stresses in element l arising from local effects (limit state method)
2l
σ
Stresses in element l arising from local effects (allowable stress method)
2l
σ
Mean stress
m
σ Mean stress of range j
m,j
σ Upper extreme value of stress cycle
u
ϕ Dynamic factors
i
4 Safety requirements and/or measures
4.1 General
Cranes shall conform to the safety requirements and/or measures of this clause. Hazards not covered in
EN 13001 (all parts) may be covered by other general requirements for all types of cranes and/or by specific
requirements for particular types of cranes, as given in the standards listed in Annex A. In addition, the
machine shall be designed according to the principles of EN ISO 12100 for hazards relevant but not significant
which are not dealt with by the above mentioned standards.
4.2 Proof calculation
4.2.1 General principles
The objective of this calculation is to prove theoretically that a crane, taking into account the service conditions
agreed between the user, designer and/or manufacturer, as well as the states during erection, dismantling and
transport, has been designed in conformance to the safety requirements to prevent mechanical hazards.
The proof of competence according to the EN 13001 series shall be carried out by using the general principles
and methods appropriate for this purpose and corresponding with the recognized state of the art in crane
design.
Alternatively, advanced and recognized theoretical or experimental methods may be used in general, provided
that they conform to the principles of this standard.
Hazards can occur if extreme values of load effects or their histories exceed the corresponding limit states. To
prevent these hazards with a margin of safety, it shall be shown that the calculated extreme values of load
effects from all loads acting simultaneously on a crane and multiplied with an adequate partial safety
coefficient, as well as the estimated histories of load effects, do not exceed their corresponding limit states at
any critical point of the crane. For this purpose the limit state method, and where applicable the allowable
stress method, is used in accordance with international and European design codes.
The analysis of load actions from individual events or representative use of a crane (representative load
histories) is required to reflect realistic unfavourable operational conditions and sequences of actions of the
crane.
Figure 1 illustrates the general layout of a proof calculation for cranes.
Key
a) models of crane and loads
b) load actions
c) limit states
d) proof
Figure 1 — Layout of the proof calculation
4.2.2 Models of cranes and loads
For the calculation of the movements, inner forces (torques in gears, rope forces, etc.) and losses of the crane
or its parts, rigid body kinetic models are used.
The loads acting on this model are the motor torques and/or brake torques, which shall balance any of the
loads acting on the moved parts as losses, mass forces caused by gravity, movement of the crane or parts
thereof, and wind forces.
From this rigid body kinetic model of the crane and the load models, any variation of displacement, speed,
acceleration and/or inner forces as well as the corresponding instantaneous values of acceleration and/or
inner forces can be derived.
These variations, if calculated in conformity with the agreed service conditions, are the base for estimating the
histories of load effects (e.g. heat equivalents) and the stress histories. Since the variations and instantaneous
values of accelerations and inner forces calculated by using a rigid body kinetic model only represent mean
values of the real process, loads caused by sudden alterations of these mean values shall be amplified by
dynamic factors ϕ to estimate their real values (see EN 13001-2).
i
For cranes or crane configurations where all the loads from different drives acting simultaneously do not affect
each other because they are acting at right angles to each other (i.e. orthogonal), load actions from drives can
be considered independently. In cases where the loads from simultaneous actions of different drives affect
each other (dependent, non-orthogonal), this shall be taken into account.
The calculation of nominal stresses in any mechanical and/or structural component of a crane or its parts can
commonly be based on appropriate elasto-static models, built up by beam or more sophisticated elements,
such as plane stress, plate or shell elements.
A nominal stress is a stress calculated in accordance with simple elastic strength of materials theory,
excluding local stress concentration effects.
4.2.3 Simulation of load actions
For the simulation of the time varying process of load actions on a crane or its parts, static equivalent loads
from independent events occurring during the intended use of a crane shall be applied to elasto-static models,
which correspond with the configuration and supporting conditions of the crane or its parts under
consideration.
NOTE In this context the term “load” or “load action” means any action or circumstance, which causes load effects in
the crane or its parts, for example: forces, intended and non-intended displacements and/or movements, temperature,
wind pressure.
Static equivalent loads are given in EN 13001-2. These static equivalent loads are considered as deterministic
actions, which have been adjusted in such a way that they represent load actions during the use of the crane
from the actions or circumstances under consideration.
The limit state method (see 4.2.7.1) does take into account the probabilistic nature of the loads, whereas the
allowable stress method (see 4.2.7.2) does not.
If a higher level of safety is required in some instance, a risk factor γ may be agreed upon and applied
n
(see EN 13001-2).
4.2.4 Load combinations and load effects
The loads shall be superimposed in such a way that the resulting load effects attain their instantaneous
extreme values for the considered situation of use. Such superimpositions are called load combinations. Basic
load combinations are given in EN 13001-2.
When establishing the load combinations, consideration shall be given to the use of the crane, taking into
account its control systems, its normative instructions for use, and any other inherent conditions, where they
relate to the specific aim of the proof of competence.
Magnitude, position and direction of all loads which act simultaneously in the sense of a load combination,
shall be chosen in such a way that extreme load effects occur in the component or design detail under
consideration. Consequently, in order to establish the extreme stresses in all the design critical points, several
loading events or crane configurations shall be studied within the same load combination, e.g. different
positions of a crab in a bridge or gantry crane.
The upper and lower extreme values of the load effects, in terms of inner forces or nominal stresses, shall be
used for a static proof calculation to avoid the hazards described in the scope. In combination with the agreed
service conditions and the kinematic properties of the crane or its parts, these values limit the histories of
inner forces or nominal stresses for the proof of fatigue strength.
For the proof of fatigue strength, the number and magnitude of significant stress cycles shall be specified.
4.2.5 Limit states
For the purposes of this standard limit states are states of the crane, its components or materials which, if
exceeded, can result in the loss of the operational characteristics of the crane. There is a distinction between
ultimate limit states and serviceability limit states as follows:
a) Ultimate limit states, given by:
1) plastic deformations from the effect of nominal stresses or sliding of frictional connections;
2) failure of components or connections (e.g. static failure, failure by fatigue or formation of critical
cracks);
3) elastic instability of the crane or its parts (e.g. buckling, bulging);
4) rigid body instability of the crane or its parts (e.g. tilting, shifting).
b) Serviceability limit states, examples of which are:
1) deformations which impair the intended utilization of the crane (e.g. function of moving components,
clearances of parts);
2) vibrations that cause damage to the crane driver or cause damage to the crane structure or restrict
the ability to operate;
3) exceeding temperature limits (e.g. overheating of motors and brakes).
4.2.6 Proof of competence
The limit states applicable to the combination of material selection, manufacturing techniques and the
specified service conditions shall be stated in the proof of competence.
For the verification that the ultimate limit states are not exceeded, the following proofs shall be established:
a) proof of strength of members, connections and components:
1) under static and quasi-static loading;
2) under cyclic loading (fatigue);
b) proof of elastic stability of the crane and its parts;
c) proof of crane stability.
For the verification that the serviceability limit states are not exceeded, the following aspects shall be
considered, and a proof be established where appropriate:
d) proof of deformation;
e) vibration;
f) thermal performance.
4.2.7 Methods for the proof of competence
4.2.7.1 Limit state method
For a general description of the limit state method, see ISO 2394. For all crane systems, the limit state method
is applicable without any restriction.
Individual characteristic loads f shall be calculated and amplified where necessary using the factors ϕ ,
i i
γ
p
multiplied by the appropriate partial safety factors γ or reduced partial safety factors and combined into F
p j
according to the load combination under consideration. When agreed upon F shall also be multiplied by an
j
appropriate risk coefficient γ The result γ ⋅ F shall be used to determine the resulting load effects S , i.e. the
n. n j k
inner forces in structural or mechanical components or the forces in articulations and supports.
For proof that yielding and elastic instability will not occur, the nominal design stresses σ due to the action of
1 l
the loads on a particular component are calculated and combined with any stresses σ resulting from local
2 l
effects, calculated using the appropriate partial safety factors γ and where agreed upon the risk coefficient γ .
p n
The resulting design stress σ shall be compared with the limit design stress lim σ. It is derived from the
l
specific strength or characteristic resistance R of material, connection or component with at least 95 %
d
probability of survival, divided by the resistance coefficient γ = 1,10.
m
For the proof of crane stability it shall be shown that under the combined action of the loads multiplied by their
partial safety factors no rigid body movement occurs. All supports, where given limits are exceeded, i.e.
wheel/rail under tension or rope under compression, shall be neglected. This means that in the sense of the
elasto-static model, the corresponding restraints shall be set “inactive”. The remaining positive and/or frictional
support forces shall be sufficient to ensure the crane stability.
A flow chart illustrating the limit state method for the proof calculation based on stresses is shown in Figure 2.
For the proof based on forces, moments, deflections the limit state method shall be applied by analogy.
Key
1 see EN 13001–2
f characteristic load i on the element component including dynamic factors
i
F combined load from load combination
j
S load effects in section k of members or supporting parts, such as inner forces and moments, resulting from
k
load combination F
j
σ stresses in the particular element l as a result of load effects S
1 l k
σ stresses in the particular element l arising from local effects
2 l
σ resulting design stress in the particular element l
l
R specified strength or characteristic resistance of the material, particular element or connection, such as the
d
stress corresponding to the yield point, limit of elastic stability or fatigue streng
...