Goods Yard Crane 2

[Andy873]

A couple of years ago I asked about goods yard cranes:

Goods yard crane

Hi, something that's puzzled me for some time is the description of Padiham goods yard (on the Great Harwood / North Lancashire loop line), the book I have calls it a "10 ton travelling or Goliah crane" - I presume they meant Goliath? Anyway, it was situated between 2 pairs of sidings, each...

www.railforums.co.uk

The thread is now closed but if you look at the photo in reply #4 from the above, this is the type of travelling crane I'm asking about but I still have a couple of questions about such a crane...

If you have four lanes of sidings with the crane spanning roads two and three then how can such a crane reach and load / unload wagons on roads one and four? wouldn't the legs of the crane be in the way?

I've looked at other yard travelling cranes in the area (same year / series) and none are drawn like this one (1890-91) from the NLS collection of OS maps:

View map: Ordnance Survey, Lancashire LXIII.4 (Altham; Hapton; Padiham; Simonstone) - Ordnance Survey 25 inch England and Wales, 1841-1952

Note the "arms" that straddle lines 1 & 4 - additional sections of gantry allowing a wider reach?

A more detailed map:

Georeferenced Maps viewer - Map images - National Library of Scotland

 

[Gloster]

I have seen photos of cranes where the two crossbeams are extended sufficiently far out to each side (or even just one) that they can load or unload from vehicles placed outside the crane. The legs of the crane on each side are placed sufficiently far apart that goods, usually up to the size of an old-style container, can pass between them. (Take the crossbeams as running east-west and the two sets of legs north-south.) There would be a hefty beam across the end of the crossbeams and extra strengthening to the outside of the legs. (Clear as mud.)

 

[Rescars]

Gloster's "mud" makes good sense. I would think that the crossbeams could have been a lighter structure if supported between roads 2 and 3 and cantilevered out over roads 1 and 4. To carry the same load, surely the crossbeams would have needed to be significantly strengthened if they were unsupported between roads 1 and 4.

 

[Andy873]

I have seen photos of cranes where the two crossbeams are extended sufficiently far out to each side (or even just one) that they can load or unload from vehicles placed outside the crane. The legs of the crane on each side are placed sufficiently far apart that goods, usually up to the size of an old-style container, can pass between them. (Take the crossbeams as running east-west and the two sets of legs north-south.) There would be a hefty beam across the end of the crossbeams and extra strengthening to the outside of the legs. (Clear as mud.)

Gloster's "mud" makes good sense. I would think that the crossbeams could have been a lighter structure if supported between roads 2 and 3 and cantilevered out over roads 1 and 4. To carry the same load, surely the crossbeams would have needed to be significantly strengthened if they were unsupported between roads 1 and 4.

I've taken a few days to think on this and thanks for the replies.

What I think the cartographer was denoting is the distance the crane could travel the length of the sidings plus its reach. There clearly couldn't be metal support columns between roads 1 and 2 or 3 and 4 as they would be in the way of the crane's own rails.

Silly question time - the "hut" which has the driver's cab, winding gear and the steam boiler for power all move from side to side with the cables and hook beneath it? (sorry, no one can ask them like me!).

 

[Rescars]

I've taken a few days to think on this and thanks for the replies.

What I think the cartographer was denoting is the distance the crane could travel the length of the sidings plus its reach. There clearly couldn't be metal support columns between roads 1 and 2 or 3 and 4 as they would be in the way of the crane's own rails.

Silly question time - the "hut" which has the driver's cab, winding gear and the steam boiler for power all move from side to side with the cables and hook beneath it? (sorry, no one can ask them like me!).

In response to your "silly question", presumably yes. This carriage would have run on rails attached to the crossbeams if not the beams themselves. I do not know how the carriage was moved from side to side. By winding in/out cables perhaps?

 

[Gloster]

I think that the little huts contained all the operating equipent to move up and down and across, and possibly also lengthways; the operator would also be in there. You can see why replacing steam or petrol/diesel motors with electric ones became attractive as you no longer had move coal, petrol or diesel up there (and pay staff to do it). Additionally, the operator could be used for other tasks at times when the crane was not moving as you didn’t have to wait for him to come down and climb back up again.