October 9 - October 13, 2017

After three Miami construction cranes snapped in the wake of Hurricane Irma in September, Miami Mayor Tomas Regalado said that the city would consider stricter codes for the cranes in the future, even if it would cause building costs to rise. The cranes are currently supposed to withstand 145 mph winds. Do you think crane codes should be increased?

Answers Votes
No 51%
Yes 40%
Other (please respond in the comments) 9%

Suggest a topic


Tagged categories: Cranes; Good Technical Practice; North America

Comment from Jesse Melton, (10/9/2017, 8:10 AM)

When it comes to large cranes even crappy ones exceed the most extreme standards for hurricane velocity winds. That's just a side effect of the engineering involved. You can't really engineer something to 147.35 MPH forces, so you over design as a hedge against unknowns and to ensure the crane will pass inspection.

Inspection is the key term here. The cranes are only inspected and certified to the point required by law. That has absolutely no bearing on the engineering involved. As I stated above, the engineering already exceeds the expectations of even the worst doom and gloom media speculation.

But if it'll make people feel better to raise the bar in regards to the resilience of big in major weather events fine. OK. It won't make a lick of difference, but that never stopped more laws from being made. But if they're going to do it then those standards need to be about the cranes, not everything except the cranes.

The 185 MPH crane regulations in Miami-Dade that were overthrown had almost one whole paragraph dealing with the engineering side of the cranes. The other three pages were regulations dealing with who can and can't inspect cranes, who can erect them and a more aggressive schedule of psych evaluations and recertifications for individual operators. The guy operating the crane might be madder than a box of frogs, and maybe high or drunk, but what difference does that make? He's not operating the crane in 145 MPH winds. That law was struck down because it was nothing but a fee grab. If it was really about the safety of the engineering the law could have been returned to legislators without the other stuff thrown in. But after all these years that hasn't happened.

Comment Join the Conversation:

Sign in to our community to add your comments.

Abrasives Inc.

Axxiom Manufacturing

HoldTight Solutions Inc.

KTA-Tator, Inc. - Corporate Office

Strand’s Industrial Coatings

Tarps manufacturing, Inc.

EDCO - Equipment Development Co. Inc.


Sauereisen, Inc.


Technology Publishing Co., 1501 Reedsdale Street, Suite 2008, Pittsburgh, PA 15233

TEL 1-412-431-8300  • FAX  1-412-431-5428  •  EMAIL webmaster@paintsquare.com

The Technology Publishing Network

PaintSquare the Journal of Protective Coatings & Linings Paint BidTracker

EXPLORE:      JPCL   |   PaintSquare News   |   Interact   |   Buying Guides   |   Webinars   |   Resources   |   Classifieds
REGISTER AND SUBSCRIBE:      Free PaintSquare Registration   |   Subscribe to JPCL   |   Subscribe to PaintSquare News
MORE:      About PaintSquare.com   |   Privacy Policy   |   Terms & Conditions   |   Support   |   Site Map   |   Search   |   Contact Us