Analysis of Load Variations and Operational Conditions on the Standardization of Spreader Bar Geometric Design

Toni Prahasto; MSK Tony Suryo Utomo; Ojo Kurdi; Philippie Daniel Nababan

doi:https://doi.org/10.47001/CJESR/2025.211002

Authors

Toni Prahasto

Faculty of Engineering, Mechanical Engineering Department, Diponegoro University, Semarang, Central Java, Indonesia

MSK Tony Suryo Utomo

Faculty of Engineering, Mechanical Engineering Department, Diponegoro University, Semarang, Central Java, Indonesia

Ojo Kurdi

Faculty of Engineering, Mechanical Engineering Department, Diponegoro University, Semarang, Central Java, Indonesia

Philippie Daniel Nababan

Faculty of Engineering, Mechanical Engineering Department, Diponegoro University, Semarang, Central Java, Indonesia

Abstract

The spreader bar is a crucial component in heavy lifting systems used across various industries such as construction and manufacturing. Load variations experienced by the spreader bar can affect stress distribution and structural deformation, ultimately impacting operational safety and efficiency. Although various methods have been employed in the design of spreader bars, discrepancies in load capacity calculations still exist, potentially compromising design reliability. This study aims to analyze the impact of load variations on the geometric design of spreader bars in order to optimize structural durability and enhance safety standards. The method used in this study is numerical simulation based on the finite element method (FEM), which enables a quantitative analysis of stress distribution, deformation, and maximum load capacity. Several spreader bar models with variations in geometry, material thickness, and loading conditions are analyzed to evaluate their structural performance. The results show that load variations significantly influence stress distribution and deformation in the spreader bar. Increasing material thickness and optimizing geometric shapes can improve load capacity and reduce the risk of structural failure. Furthermore, the developed simulation model provides sufficiently accurate predictions compared to experimental-based approaches alone, making it a valuable reference in the design of spreader bars that are more adaptable to varying operational conditions. The conclusion of this study emphasizes that the integration of numerical simulations in spreader bar design can enhance efficiency and safety in industrial applications. This research is expected to serve as a foundation for developing more accurate design standards and aid in designing more reliable spreader bars tailored to industry needs.

Keywords

Design Standards Geometric design Operational Conditions Spreader Bar

Citation of this Article

Toni Prahasto, MSK Tony Suryo Utomo, Ojo Kurdi, & Philippie Daniel Nababan. (2025). Analysis of Load Variations and Operational Conditions on the Standardization of Spreader Bar Geometric Design. Current Journal of Engineering and Science Research. 2(11), 6-11. Article DOI: https://doi.org/10.47001/CJESR/2025.211002

References

S. Ebrahimzadeh et al., “Flexural behaviour of GFRP-reinforced concrete pontoon decks under static four-point and uniform loads,” Structures, vol. 59, no. December 2023, p. 105796, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.istruc.2023.105796.
D. Duerr, “Design Category and Service Class Selection for Below-the-Hook Lifting Devices,” Pract. Period. Struct. Des. Constr., vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 43–47, 2008, doi: 10.1061/(asce)1084-0680(2008)13:2(43).
A.Shringi, M. Arashpour, T. Dwyer, A. Prouzeau, and H. Li, “Safety in Off-Site Construction: Simulation of Crane-Lifting Operations Using VR and BIM,” J. Archit. Eng., vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 1–10, 2023, doi: 10.1061/(asce)ae.1943-5568.0000570.
J. Liu and X. Qu, “Postural stability and risk of slips in lifting tasks: Effects of load weight and load knowledge,” Int. J. Ind. Ergon., vol. 105, no. December 2024, p. 103675, 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.ergon.2024.103675.
D. Owolabi and C. Loss, “Experimental and numerical study on the bending response of a prefabricated composite CLT-steel floor module,” Eng. Struct., vol. 260, no. April, p. 114278, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2022.114278.
O. Gouda, A. Hassanein, and K. Galal, “Experimental and numerical study on the crack width and deflection performance of GFRP reinforced concrete beams,” Eng. Struct., vol. 283, no. December 2022, p. 115721, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2023.115721.
D. D. Lichti et al., “Structural Deflection Measurement with a Range Camera,” J. Surv. Eng., vol. 138, no. 2, pp. 66–76, 2012, doi: 10.1061/(asce)su.1943-5428.0000074.

[1] S. Ebrahimzadeh et al., “Flexural behaviour of GFRP-reinforced concrete pontoon decks under static four-point and uniform loads,” Structures, vol. 59, no. December 2023, p. 105796, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.istruc.2023.105796.

[2] D. Duerr, “Design Category and Service Class Selection for Below-the-Hook Lifting Devices,” Pract. Period. Struct. Des. Constr., vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 43–47, 2008, doi: 10.1061/(asce)1084-0680(2008)13:2(43).

[3] A.Shringi, M. Arashpour, T. Dwyer, A. Prouzeau, and H. Li, “Safety in Off-Site Construction: Simulation of Crane-Lifting Operations Using VR and BIM,” J. Archit. Eng., vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 1–10, 2023, doi: 10.1061/(asce)ae.1943-5568.0000570.

[4] J. Liu and X. Qu, “Postural stability and risk of slips in lifting tasks: Effects of load weight and load knowledge,” Int. J. Ind. Ergon., vol. 105, no. December 2024, p. 103675, 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.ergon.2024.103675.

[5] D. Owolabi and C. Loss, “Experimental and numerical study on the bending response of a prefabricated composite CLT-steel floor module,” Eng. Struct., vol. 260, no. April, p. 114278, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2022.114278.

[6] O. Gouda, A. Hassanein, and K. Galal, “Experimental and numerical study on the crack width and deflection performance of GFRP reinforced concrete beams,” Eng. Struct., vol. 283, no. December 2022, p. 115721, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2023.115721.

[7] D. D. Lichti et al., “Structural Deflection Measurement with a Range Camera,” J. Surv. Eng., vol. 138, no. 2, pp. 66–76, 2012, doi: 10.1061/(asce)su.1943-5428.0000074.