{"id":8641,"date":"2026-10-13T19:14:15","date_gmt":"2026-10-14T03:14:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/szlmi.com\/?p=8641"},"modified":"2026-10-13T19:14:15","modified_gmt":"2026-10-14T03:14:15","slug":"crane-stability-monitoring-october-2026","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/szlmi.com\/fr\/crane-stability-monitoring-october-2026\/","title":{"rendered":"Surveillance de la stabilit\u00e9 des grues : pourquoi des charges l\u00e9g\u00e8res peuvent faire basculer les grues"},"content":{"rendered":"

D\u00e9claration d'int\u00e9r\u00eats :<\/strong>\u00a0This article is published by SeeZol (szlmi.com), a manufacturer of load moment indicators (LMI), safe load limiters and onboard weighing systems for construction machinery. We sell the equipment discussed below, so we have a commercial interest in the conclusions. We have kept the line between fact and sales talk visible: we describe what each device is designed to do and the direction in which it acts, we do not quote accuracy, capacity or response-time figures for any model, and \u2014 in a dedicated section \u2014 we list what these devices cannot do. One of the incidents described contradicts an account we published on 10 October 2026; we correct our own record below rather than leave it standing.<\/p>\n

Five days, four incidents, one blind spot<\/h2>\n

At about 3:10 p.m. on 9 October, at a power plant construction site in Bucheon, Gyeonggi Province, South Korea, a counterweight being hoisted into place on a tower crane swung and struck workers who were installing the counterweight blocks. A 58-year-old tower crane worker was taken to hospital in cardiac arrest and died; another 58-year-old worker was seriously injured. The Bucheon office of the Ministry of Employment and Labor ordered work to stop and is investigating, including whether the Occupational Safety and Health Act and the Serious Accidents Punishment Act were violated (Seoul Economic Daily<\/a>;\u00a0SBS News<\/a>).<\/p>\n

On 10 October, in Permatang Tinggi, Bukit Mertajam, in Malaysia\u2019s Penang state, a crane parked at an elderly care home toppled onto the roof of a residents\u2019 building. The Penang Fire and Rescue Department said the crane was believed to have overturned after losing stability while parked on uneven ground. An 84-year-old resident suffered head injuries and was taken to hospital; the other 37 residents and 11 workers, including the crane operator, were unharmed (The Star<\/a>;\u00a0The Vibes<\/a>). The department\u2019s account is an initial assessment; no cause has been confirmed.<\/p>\n

The third incident is the one we got partly wrong. On 8 October a truck crane overturned in Shenzhen\u2019s Bao\u2019an district while hoisting cable tray during rooftop solar work. Our 10 October article repeated the owner\u2019s account, reported the same day, that the load was overweight. On 10 October, Southern Metropolis Daily published a site revisit quoting the industrial-park management: the tray section being lifted weighed less than 250 kg (500 jin), and the driver had not extended the truck crane\u2019s outriggers or set up auxiliary support before lifting. A 50-tonne-class crane, by that account, was tipped over by a quarter-tonne load (Southern Metropolis Daily via NetEase<\/a>;\u00a0The Beijing News, 8 October, owner\u2019s account<\/a>). The two accounts are contradictory and neither is an official finding; we present both and draw no conclusion beyond what each source claims.<\/p>\n

Across 8\u20139 October, Chinese market-surveillance authorities continued post-holiday enforcement. Chengdu\u2019s Xindu district published the 85th instalment of its hazard-exposure series: a rail-equipment plant was found with a missing or failed emergency-stop and a missing or failed rated-capacity limiter \u2014 both classified as major accident hazards \u2014 and was ordered to stop using the crane, repair and re-test (Xindu District Market Supervision, via NetEase<\/a>). Guangdong\u2019s special-equipment inspection institute travelled to Guizhou to re-verify the moment limiters and load limiters of tower cranes on a highway project (China Quality News<\/a>).<\/p>\n

\n

\"Overturned
An overturned mobile crane. Illustrative photograph only \u2014 this is not one of the incidents described above. Photo: Patrick Mackie \/ Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 2.0.<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/figure>\n

Four items, three countries, five days. A counterweight that was being installed rather than a load being lifted; a machine that tipped while parked; a machine that tipped with almost nothing on the hook; and a regulator treating a dead limiter as a major hazard. What connects them is not the weight of the load. It is the state of the machine: what it was standing on, what was rigged to it, and whether anyone \u2014 or any device \u2014 was watching that state.<\/p>\n

What crane stability monitoring actually watches<\/h2>\n

A crane\u2019s limit is a moment limit, not a weight limit. The overturning moment at the base is produced by the load times its radius \u2014 and resisted by the machine\u2019s own weight, its counterweight, and the support the ground and the outriggers provide. Change any of those and the same load moves from safe to unsafe without the load itself changing at all. This is why crane stability monitoring is a broader job than load indication: the system has to know the load, but it also has to know the configuration the load is acting against.<\/p>\n

In practice that means four families of inputs:<\/p>\n