Strain Analysis of Preexisting Grain Bin Structures For Retrofitting Safe Entry Technology
Open Access
- Author:
- Dyer, Michael L
- Graduate Program:
- Agricultural and Biological Engineering
- Degree:
- Master of Science
- Document Type:
- Master Thesis
- Date of Defense:
- October 28, 2021
- Committee Members:
- Jude Liu, Thesis Advisor/Co-Advisor
Jude Liu, Thesis Advisor/Co-Advisor
Daniel Edward Ciolkosz, Committee Member
Reginald Felix Hamilton, Committee Member
Suat Irmak, Program Head/Chair - Keywords:
- Safety
Grain Bin
Farm
Agriculture
Agricultural Engineering
ASABE
3D Modeling
Solidworks
Lifeline
Bin
Grain
Corn
Entrapment
Engulfment
Strain
Finite Element Analysis
FEA
Safety and Health - Abstract:
- Grain bins are regarded as one of the most hazardous working environments in the agricultural sector. While OSHA federal regulations mandate entrants wear a harness and lifeline while in a bin, farms with less than 10 employees are exempt from all OSHA requirements. Most entrapment and engulfment incidents occur at these ~260,000 OSHA exempt grain storage facilities. If these facilities possessed and properly implemented safety technology, many of these incidents could be prevented. In August 2018, ASABE standard ANSI/ASABE S624 was approved, recommending that all new grain bins produced have anchor points capable of handling a 2000lbf loading for attachment of bin entry lifeline systems. However, many preexisting grain bins do not have these anchor points. A 3D finite element model of a grain bin was created and used to model the structural performance of a pre-existing grain bin that is subjected to simulated loadings consistent with the loads seen during an entrapment incident. Verification of this 3D model was attempted via experimental testing on two on-farm grain bins using strain gauges. The experimental strain was recorded and an error comparison was conducted to determine the error seen between the simulated testing and the experimental testing. The error analysis resulted in a range from -1108.59% error to 1782.04% error. Assumptions in both the modeling and experimentation processes were the cause of most of this error and unfortunately time did not permit continued testing to isolate the error from each assumption. This has spurred the need for further testing and the use of different testing methods. Continued strain gauge testing is needed, as well as bin deflection testing, to ensure more consistent results before this model can be used to generate recommendations regarding the retrofit of bin entry lifeline systems.